Search Results

Search found 1740 results on 70 pages for 'procedures'.

Page 28/70 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • How to sell logistical procedures that require less time to perform but more finesse?

    - by foampile
    I am working with a group where part of the responsibilities is managing a certain set of configuration files which, of course, have the same skeleton/structure across different environments but different values (like server, user, this setting, that setting etc.). Pretty classic scenario... The problem is that everyone just goes and modifies final, environment-specific files and basically repeats the work for every environment. Personally, I am offended to have to peform repeatable, mundane tasks in this day and age when we have technologies to automate it all. So I devised a very simple procedure of abstracting the files into templates, stubbing env-specific values with parameters and then wrote a simple Perl script that, given a template and an environment matrix with env-specific values for each param, produces the final file. So this is nothing special, cutting-edge or revolutionary -- I am pretty sure that 20 years ago efficient places did their CM like that. However, that requires that changes are made at the template level and then distributed across different environments using the script and not making changes in the final environment-specific files. This is where I am encountering resentment as they feel "comfortable" doing it their old, manual, repeated labor way. Personally, I don't have a problem with them working hard rather than smart but the problem is when I have to build on top of someone else's changes, I have to merge their changes into my template from a specific file, which takes time and is grueling. So my question is how to go about selling my method, which makes it so much faster in an environment that is resentful to change and where most things have to be done at the level of the least competent team member?

    Read the article

  • Performance optimization for mssql: decrease stored procedures execution time or unload the server?

    - by tim
    Hello everybody! We have a web service which provides search over hotels. There is a problem with performance: a single request to the service takes around 5000 ms. Almost all of the time is spent in database by executing storing procedures. During the request our server (mssql2008) consumes ~90% of the processor time. When 2 requests are made in parallel the average time grows and is around 7000 ms. When number of request is increasing, the average time of response is increasing as well. We have 20-30 requests per minute. Which kind of optimization is the best in this case having in mind that the goal is to provide stable response time for the service: 1) Try to decrease the stored procedures execution time 2) Try to find the way how to unload the server It is interesting to hear from people who deal with booking sites. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How do I call Informix stored procedures from Perl?

    - by superjtc
    How do I call informix stored procedures from Perl? I use DBD::ODBC to connect to informix database, but I don't know how to call procedures. my code like this: my $dbh=DBI->connect("dbi:".DBDRIVE.":".DBNAME,DBUSER,DBPASS,{RaiseError=>0,PrintError=>0,AutoCommit=>1}) ||die $DBI::errstr; $dbh->do("execute procedure sp_test('2010-05-01 00:00:00')") || warn "failed\n"; $dbh->disconnect(); when I run it, it didn't get error. But I get nothing when I check the database. the store procedure works fine if I run it in database directly. Anyone can help me out?

    Read the article

  • Oracle Tutor: Learn Tutor in the comfort of your own home or office

    - by emily.chorba(at)oracle.com
    The primary challenge for companies faced with documenting policies and procedures is to realize that they can do this documentation in-house, with existing resources, using Oracle Tutor. Procedure documentation is a critical success component for supporting corporate governance or other regulatory compliance initiatives and when implementing or upgrading to a new business application. There are over 1000 Oracle Tutor customers worldwide that have used Tutor to create, distribute, and maintain their business procedures. This is easily accomplished because of Tutor's: Ease of use by those who have to write procedures (Microsoft Word based authoring) Ease of company-wide implementation (complex document management activities are centralized) Ease of use by workers who have to follow the procedures (play script format)Ease of access by remote workers (web-enabled) Oracle University is offering Live Virtual Tutor classes! The class lasts four days, starts on Tuesday and finishes on Friday. This course is an introduction to the Oracle Tutor suite of products. It focuses on the Policy and Procedure writing feature set of the Tutor applications. Participants will learn about writing procedures and maintaining these particular process document types, all using the Tutor method. The next three classes are scheduled for: April 19 - 22 May 31 - June 3 July 5 - 8 You will learn to: Write procedures Create procedure Flowcharts Write support documents Create Impact Analysis Reports Create Role-base Employee Manuals Deploy online Employee Manuals on an Intranet Enjoy learning Tutor in your local environment. Start the sign up process from this link Learn More For more information about Tutor, visit Oracle.com or the Tutor Blog. Post your questions at the Tutor Forum. Emily Chorba Principle Product Manager Oracle Tutor & BPM

    Read the article

  • [SQLServer JDBC Driver][SQLServer]Could not find stored procedure 'master..xp_jdbc_open2'.

    - by Vijaya Moderator -Oracle
    When connecting to MS SQL Server Database via Weblogic Datasource and using XA jdbc driver, the following error is thrown. <Jun 3, 2014 5:16:49 AM PDT> <Error> <Console> <BEA-240003> <Console encountered the following error java.sql.SQLException: [FMWGEN][SQLServer JDBC Driver][SQLServer]Could not find stored procedure 'master..xp_jdbc_open2'. at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddb_.b(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddb_.a(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddb9.b(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddb9.a(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserver.tds.ddr.v(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserver.tds.ddr.a(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserver.tds.ddq.a(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserver.tds.ddr.a(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserver.ddj.m(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddel.e(Unknown Source)at weblogic.jdbc.sqlserverbase.ddel.a(Unknown Source)  The cause behind the issue is that  the MS SQL Server was not installed with the Stored procedures to enable JTA/XA Solution To connect to SQL Server via XA Driver from WLS Datasource you need to install Stored Procedures for JTATo use JDBC distributed transactions through JTA, your system administrator should use the following procedure to install Microsoft SQL Server JDBC XA procedures. This procedure must be repeated for each MS SQL Server installation that will be involved in a distributed transaction.To install stored procedures for JTA:1. Copy the appropriate sqljdbc.dll and instjdbc.sql files from the WL_HOME\server\lib directory to the SQL_Server_Root/bin directory of the MS SQL Server database server, where WL_HOME is the directory in which WebLogic server is installed, typically c:\Oracle\Middleware\wlserver_10.x.  Note:  If you are installing stored procedures on a database server with multiple Microsoft SQL Server instances, each running SQL Server instance must be able to locate the sqljdbc.dll file.Therefore the sqljdbc.dll file needs to be anywhere on the global PATH or on the application-specific path. For the application-specific path, place the sqljdbc.dll file into the :\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL$\Binn directory for each instance. 2. From the database server, use the ISQL utility to run the instjdbc.sql script. As a precaution, have your system administrator back up the master database before running instjdbc.sql. At a command prompt, use the following syntax to run instjdbc.sql:  ISQL -Usa -Psa_password -Sserver_name -ilocation\instjdbc.sql  where:  sa_password is the password of the system administrator.  server_name is the name of the server on which SQL Server resides.  location is the full path to instjdbc.sql. (You copied this script to the SQL_Server_Root/bin directory in step 1.)  The instjdbc.sql script generates many messages. In general, these messages can be ignored; however, the system administrator should scan the output for any messages that may indicate an execution error. The last message should indicate that instjdbc.sql ran successfully. The script fails when there is insufficient space available in the master database to store the JDBC XA procedures or to log changes to existing procedures.

    Read the article

  • How can I make exception handling for all existing SQL server 2005 Stored Procedures, view and funct

    - by Space Cracker
    we have a portal that have SQL server 2005 database that contain about 1750 stored procedures , 250 view and 200 function and 95% of them not have handling exception in their code .. we search about any way that allow us making such a global exception handling in SQL that receive any exception happen in any SP,view or function and stored it in a table we made .. is there something like this in SQL server 2005 or we must write exception handling code on each item ?

    Read the article

  • I'm looking for a reliable way to verify T-SQL stored procedures. Anybody got one?

    - by Cory Larson
    Hi all-- We're upgrading from SQL Server 2005 to 2008. Almost every database in the 2005 instance is set to 2000 compatibility mode, but we're jumping to 2008. Our testing is complete, but what we've learned is that we need to get faster at it. I've discovered some stored procedures that either SELECT data from missing tables or try to ORDER BY columns that don't exist. Wrapping the SQL to create the procedures in SET PARSEONLY ON and trapping errors in a try/catch only catches the invalid columns in the ORDER BYs. It does not find the error with the procedure selecting data from the missing table. SSMS 2008's intellisense, however, DOES find the issue, but I can still go ahead and successfully run the ALTER script for the procedure without it complaining. So, why can I even get away with creating a procedure that fails when it runs? Are there any tools out there that can do better than what I've tried? The first tool I found wasn't very useful: DbValidator from CodeProject, but it finds fewer problems than this script I found on SqlServerCentral, which found the invalid column references. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Check Syntax of Database Objects -- Copyrighted work. Free to use as a tool to check your own code or in -- any software not sold. All other uses require written permission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Turn on ParseOnly so that we don't actually execute anything. SET PARSEONLY ON GO -- Create a table to iterate through declare @ObjectList table (ID_NUM int NOT NULL IDENTITY (1, 1), OBJ_NAME varchar(255), OBJ_TYPE char(2)) -- Get a list of most of the scriptable objects in the DB. insert into @ObjectList (OBJ_NAME, OBJ_TYPE) SELECT name, type FROM sysobjects WHERE type in ('P', 'FN', 'IF', 'TF', 'TR', 'V') order by type, name -- Var to hold the SQL that we will be syntax checking declare @SQLToCheckSyntaxFor varchar(max) -- Var to hold the name of the object we are currently checking declare @ObjectName varchar(255) -- Var to hold the type of the object we are currently checking declare @ObjectType char(2) -- Var to indicate our current location in iterating through the list of objects declare @IDNum int -- Var to indicate the max number of objects we need to iterate through declare @MaxIDNum int -- Set the inital value and max value select @IDNum = Min(ID_NUM), @MaxIDNum = Max(ID_NUM) from @ObjectList -- Begin iteration while @IDNum <= @MaxIDNum begin -- Load per iteration values here select @ObjectName = OBJ_NAME, @ObjectType = OBJ_TYPE from @ObjectList where ID_NUM = @IDNum -- Get the text of the db Object (ie create script for the sproc) SELECT @SQLToCheckSyntaxFor = OBJECT_DEFINITION(OBJECT_ID(@ObjectName, @ObjectType)) begin try -- Run the create script (remember that PARSEONLY has been turned on) EXECUTE(@SQLToCheckSyntaxFor) end try begin catch -- See if the object name is the same in the script and the catalog (kind of a special error) if (ERROR_PROCEDURE() <> @ObjectName) begin print 'Error in ' + @ObjectName print ' The Name in the script is ' + ERROR_PROCEDURE()+ '. (They don''t match)' end -- If the error is just that this already exists then we don't want to report that. else if (ERROR_MESSAGE() <> 'There is already an object named ''' + ERROR_PROCEDURE() + ''' in the database.') begin -- Report the error that we got. print 'Error in ' + ERROR_PROCEDURE() print ' ERROR TEXT: ' + ERROR_MESSAGE() end end catch -- Setup to iterate to the next item in the table select @IDNum = case when Min(ID_NUM) is NULL then @IDNum + 1 else Min(ID_NUM) end from @ObjectList where ID_NUM > @IDNum end -- Turn the ParseOnly back off. SET PARSEONLY OFF GO Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework VS LINQ to SQL VS ADO.NET with stored procedures?

    - by BritishDeveloper
    How would you rate each of them in terms of: Performance Speed of development Neat, intuitive, maintainable code Flexibility Overall I like my SQL and so have always been a die-hard fan of ADO.NET and stored procedures but I recently had a play with Linq to SQL and was blown away by how quickly I was writing out my DataAccess layer and have decided to spend some time really understanding either Linq to SQL or EF... or neither? I just want to check, that there isn't a great flaw in any of these technologies that would render my research time useless. E.g. performance is terrible, it's cool for simple apps but can only take you so far

    Read the article

  • Inevitable Corporate Bureaucracy

    - by Ahsan Alam
    Top executives of most smaller organizations want their companies to be different from the larger corporations. They want their organizations smaller in size; but bigger in productivity by eliminating red tapes and corporate bureaucracy. When the company is smaller, people often work like firefighters – taking on new business and technology challenges without thinking about any procedures and guidelines. People also tend to wear many hats to accomplish tasks quickly in order to integrate new businesses. For example, software developers in smaller organizations may take on responsibilities of client interactions, requirements gathering, design and development, code deployment, production support, network infrastructure support, database design and maintenance along with countless other duties. In addition, systems in smaller organizations tend to be loosely guarded. So, people often don't follow many procedures in order to setup environments and implement technical projects. It's not uncommon to change code and deploy without anyone realizing. Similarly, business requirements may also get defined in an informal manner without any type of documentation. As the company grows, everything starts to change significantly impacting people and the overall business process. Suddenly, following procedures become extremely important. Consequently, new roles, guidelines and procedures start to emerge. Everything from business process to technology implementation start to become more and more process oriented. Organizations start to define and document steps, invent procedure to track process and systems level changes, and start restricting access to various systems for security reasons. At the same time, as a growing company start doing businesses with larger clienteles, they are automatically forced to abide by all sorts of industry compliance laws. Moreover, growing companies tend to recruit experienced individuals to fill new roles who usually bring their expertise from larger and more bureaucratic organizations.   Despite the best efforts from the top executives, it seems increased number of procedures and guidelines as well as new recruits automatically contribute to the evolution of corporate bureaucracy. Maybe, corporate bureaucracy is an inevitable side effect of a growing organization.

    Read the article

  • Modular Database Structures

    - by John D
    I have been examining the code base we use in work and I am worried about the size the packages have grown to. The actual code is modular, procedures have been broken down into small functional (and testable) parts. The issue I see is that we have 100 procedures in a single package - almost an entire domain model. I had thought of breaking these packages down - to create sub domains that are centered around the procedure relationships to other objects. Group a bunch of procedures that have 80% of their relationships to three tables etc. The end result would be a lot more packages, but the packages would be smaller and I feel the entire code base would be more readable - when procedures cross between two domain models it is less of a struggle to figure which package it belongs to. The problem I now have is what the actual benefit of all this would really be. I looked at the general advantages of modularity: 1. Re-usability 2. Asynchronous Development 3. Maintainability Yet when I consider our latest development, the procedures within the packages are already reusable. At this advanced stage we rarely require asynchronous development - and when it is required we simply ladder the stories across iterations. So I guess my question is if people know of reasons why you would break down classes rather than just the methods inside of classes? Right now I do believe there is an issue with these mega packages forming but the only benefit I can really pin down to break them down is readability - something that experience gained from working with them would solve.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server CLR stored procedures in data processing tasks - good or evil?

    - by Gart
    In short - is it a good design solution to implement most of the business logic in CLR stored procedures? I have read much about them recently but I can't figure out when they should be used, what are the best practices, are they good enough or not. For example, my business application needs to parse a large fixed-length text file, extract some numbers from each line in the file, according to these numbers apply some complex business rules (involving regex matching, pattern matching against data from many tables in the database and such), and as a result of this calculation update records in the database. There is also a GUI for the user to select the file, view the results, etc. This application seems to be a good candidate to implement the classic 3-tier architecture: the Data Layer, the Logic Layer, and the GUI layer. The Data Layer would access the database The Logic Layer would run as a WCF service and implement the business rules, interacting with the Data Layer The GUI Layer would be a means of communication between the Logic Layer and the User. Now, thinking of this design, I can see that most of the business rules may be implemented in a SQL CLR and stored in SQL Server. I might store all my raw data in the database, run the processing there, and get the results. I see some advantages and disadvantages of this solution: Pros: The business logic runs close to the data, meaning less network traffic. Process all data at once, possibly utilizing parallelizm and optimal execution plan. Cons: Scattering of the business logic: some part is here, some part is there. Questionable design solution, may encounter unknown problems. Difficult to implement a progress indicator for the processing task. I would like to hear all your opinions about SQL CLR. Does anybody use it in production? Are there any problems with such design? Is it a good thing?

    Read the article

  • Using MS Moles with datacontext and stored procedures without using a Connection string.

    - by Brian
    I have just begun to work with MS Moles for testing and I have followed the idea/pattern in which jcollum(thanks) uses a Mole for a table in this stackoverflow question here. But I am having a problem as I do not want to have to pass a connection string when I use the datasource as such: using (TheDataContext dataContext = new TheDataContext(myConnectionString)) { dataContext.ExecuteStoredprocedure(value, ref ValueExists); } I really like the fact that I just need to mole the table and everything else is done for me. I realize I could just mole the ExecuteStoredProcedure method, but I am wondering if I could just somehow avoid the sql exception I am getting here when I do not pass in the connection string. Or, if I there is a better way to do this? Therefore, does anyone have a solution so that I can avoid placing in the connection string? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Executing sequential stored procedures; works in query analyzer, doesn't in my .NET application

    - by evanmortland
    Hello, I have an audit record table that I am writing to. I am connecting to MyDb, which has a stored procedure called 'CreateAudit', which is a passthrough stored procedure to another database on the same machine called MyOther DB with a stored procedure called 'CreatedAudit' as well. In other words in MyDB I have CreateAudit, which does the following EXEC dbo.MyOtherDB.CreateAudit. I call the MyDb CreateAudit stored procedure from my application, using subsonic as the DAL. The first time I call it, I call it with the following (pseudocode): Result = CreateAudit(recordId, "Opened") One line after that, I call: Result2 = CreateAudit(recordId, "Closed") In my second stored procedure it is supposed to mark the record that was created by the CreateAudit(recordId, "Opened") with a status of closed. It works great if I run them independently of one another, but when they run in sequence in the application, the record is not marked as "Closed". When I run SQL profiler I see that both queries ran, and if I copy the queries out and run them from query analyzer the record gets marked as closed 100% of the time! When I run it from the application, about once every 20 times or so, the record is successfully marked closed - the other 19 times nothing happens, but I do not get an error! Is it possible for the .NET app to skip over the ouput from the first stored procedure and start executing the second stored procedure before the record in the first is created? When I add a "WAITFOR DELAY '00:00:00:003'" to the top of my stored procedure, the record is also closed 100% of the time. My head is spinning, any ideas why this is happening! Thanks for any responses, very interested in hearing how this can happen.

    Read the article

  • Session hijacking prevention...how far will my script get me? additional prevention procedures?

    - by Yusaf Khaliq
    When the user logs in the current session vairables are set $_SESSION['user']['timeout'] = time(); $_SESSION['user']['ip'] = $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']; $_SESSION['user']['agent'] = $_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT']; In my common.php page (required on ALL php pages) i have used the below script, which resets a 15 minute timer each time the user is active furhtermore checks the IP address and checks the user_agent, if they do not match that as of when they first logged in/when the session was first set, the session is unset furthermore with inactivity of up to 15 minutes the session is also unset. ... is what i have done a good method for preventing session hijacking furthermore is it secure and or is it enough? If not what more can be done? if(!empty($_SESSION['user'])){ if ($_SESSION['user']['timeout'] + 15 * 60 < time()) { unset($_SESSION['user']); } else { $_SESSION['user']['timeout'] = time(); if($_SESSION['user']['ip'] != $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']){ unset($_SESSION['user']); } if($_SESSION['user']['agent'] != $_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT']){ unset($_SESSION['user']); } } }

    Read the article

  • How do i structure my SQL Database (tables, Schemas, users, stored procedures etc.) to prepare it fo

    - by AlexRednic
    I think the title is self explanatory. What I'm looking for is material so I can further my knowledge. I've never developed a full application before so building one from scratch is a bit overwhelming for me. And the first bump in the road is the database. Websites, articles, books, elaborate answers, anything will do as long as they keep me on the right track. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why do all procedures have to be defined before the compiler sees them?

    - by incrediman
    For example, take a look at this code (from tspl4): (define proc1 (lambda (x y) (proc2 y x))) If I run this as my program in scheme... #!r6rs (import (rnrs)) (define proc1 (lambda (x y) (proc2 y x))) I get this error: expand: unbound identifier in module in: proc2 ...This code works fine though: #!r6rs (import (rnrs)) (define proc2 +) (define proc1 (lambda (x y) (proc2 y x))) (display (proc1 2 3)) ;output: 5

    Read the article

  • How many Stored Procedures created everyday ( problem in converting Datetime )?

    - by Space Cracker
    I make a query that return to me the count of Stored Procedure that created everyday as follow SELECT convert(varchar, crdate, 103) as Date,Count(*) as Counter FROM sysobjects WHERE (xtype = 'p') AND (name NOT LIKE 'dt%') Group by convert(varchar, crdate, 103) and its already work but dates appear in string format that i can't order it such as below 01/03/2010 3 01/04/2008 4 01/05/2010 5 01/11/2008 1 01/12/2008 4 02/03/2008 1 02/03/2010 2 02/04/2008 4 02/05/2010 2 02/11/2008 2 02/11/2009 2 02/12/2008 4 03/01/2010 1 03/02/2010 2 03/03/2010 2 03/04/2008 2 03/04/2010 2 03/05/2008 1 03/05/2010 2 I want to make that in which date is in datetime format that i can make order by successfully, i tried convert(datetime, crdate, 103) but it show Full date any idea of how to do ?

    Read the article

  • The Exceptional EXCEPT clause

    - by steveh99999
    Ok, I exaggerate, but it can be useful… I came across some ‘poorly-written’ stored procedures on a SQL server recently, that were using sp_xml_preparedocument. Unfortunately these procs were  not properly removing the memory allocated to XML structures – ie they were not subsequently calling sp_xml_removedocument… I needed a quick way of identifying on the server how many stored procedures this affected.. Here’s what I used.. EXEC sp_msforeachdb 'USE ? SELECT DB_NAME(),OBJECT_NAME(s1.id) FROM syscomments s1 WHERE [text] LIKE ''%sp_xml_preparedocument%'' EXCEPT SELECT DB_NAME(),OBJECT_NAME(s2.id) FROM syscomments s2 WHERE [text] LIKE ''%sp_xml_removedocument%'' ‘ There’s three nice features about the code above… 1. It uses sp_msforeachdb. There’s a nice blog on this statement here 2. It uses the EXCEPT clause.  So in the above query I get all the procedures which include the sp_xml_preparedocument string, but by using the EXCEPT clause I remove all the procedures which contain sp_xml_removedocument.  Read more about EXCEPT here 3. It can be used to quickly identify incorrect usage of sp_xml_preparedocument. Read more about this here The above query isn’t perfect – I’m not properly parsing the SQL text to ignore comments for example - but for the quick analysis I needed to perform, it was just the job…

    Read the article

  • Listing common SQL Code Smells.

    - by Phil Factor
    Once you’ve done a number of SQL Code-reviews, you’ll know those signs in the code that all might not be well. These ’Code Smells’ are coding styles that don’t directly cause a bug, but are indicators that all is not well with the code. . Kent Beck and Massimo Arnoldi seem to have coined the phrase in the "OnceAndOnlyOnce" page of www.C2.com, where Kent also said that code "wants to be simple". Bad Smells in Code was an essay by Kent Beck and Martin Fowler, published as Chapter 3 of the book ‘Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code’ (ISBN 978-0201485677) Although there are generic code-smells, SQL has its own particular coding habits that will alert the programmer to the need to re-factor what has been written. See Exploring Smelly Code   and Code Deodorants for Code Smells by Nick Harrison for a grounding in Code Smells in C# I’ve always been tempted by the idea of automating a preliminary code-review for SQL. It would be so useful to trawl through code and pick up the various problems, much like the classic ‘Lint’ did for C, and how the Code Metrics plug-in for .NET Reflector by Jonathan 'Peli' de Halleux is used for finding Code Smells in .NET code. The problem is that few of the standard procedural code smells are relevant to SQL, and we need an agreed list of code smells. Merrilll Aldrich made a grand start last year in his blog Top 10 T-SQL Code Smells.However, I'd like to make a start by discovering if there is a general opinion amongst Database developers what the most important SQL Smells are. One can be a bit defensive about code smells. I will cheerfully write very long stored procedures, even though they are frowned on. I’ll use dynamic SQL occasionally. You can only use them as an aid for your own judgment and it is fine to ‘sign them off’ as being appropriate in particular circumstances. Also, whole classes of ‘code smells’ may be irrelevant for a particular database. The use of proprietary SQL, for example, is only a ‘code smell’ if there is a chance that the database will have to be ported to another RDBMS. The use of dynamic SQL is a risk only with certain security models. As the saying goes,  a CodeSmell is a hint of possible bad practice to a pragmatist, but a sure sign of bad practice to a purist. Plamen Ratchev’s wonderful article Ten Common SQL Programming Mistakes lists some of these ‘code smells’ along with out-and-out mistakes, but there are more. The use of nested transactions, for example, isn’t entirely incorrect, even though the database engine ignores all but the outermost: but it does flag up the possibility that the programmer thinks that nested transactions are supported. If anything requires some sort of general agreement, the definition of code smells is one. I’m therefore going to make this Blog ‘dynamic, in that, if anyone twitters a suggestion with a #SQLCodeSmells tag (or sends me a twitter) I’ll update the list here. If you add a comment to the blog with a suggestion of what should be added or removed, I’ll do my best to oblige. In other words, I’ll try to keep this blog up to date. The name against each 'smell' is the name of the person who Twittered me, commented about or who has written about the 'smell'. it does not imply that they were the first ever to think of the smell! Use of deprecated syntax such as *= (Dave Howard) Denormalisation that requires the shredding of the contents of columns. (Merrill Aldrich) Contrived interfaces Use of deprecated datatypes such as TEXT/NTEXT (Dave Howard) Datatype mis-matches in predicates that rely on implicit conversion.(Plamen Ratchev) Using Correlated subqueries instead of a join   (Dave_Levy/ Plamen Ratchev) The use of Hints in queries, especially NOLOCK (Dave Howard /Mike Reigler) Few or No comments. Use of functions in a WHERE clause. (Anil Das) Overuse of scalar UDFs (Dave Howard, Plamen Ratchev) Excessive ‘overloading’ of routines. The use of Exec xp_cmdShell (Merrill Aldrich) Excessive use of brackets. (Dave Levy) Lack of the use of a semicolon to terminate statements Use of non-SARGable functions on indexed columns in predicates (Plamen Ratchev) Duplicated code, or strikingly similar code. Misuse of SELECT * (Plamen Ratchev) Overuse of Cursors (Everyone. Special mention to Dave Levy & Adrian Hills) Overuse of CLR routines when not necessary (Sam Stange) Same column name in different tables with different datatypes. (Ian Stirk) Use of ‘broken’ functions such as ‘ISNUMERIC’ without additional checks. Excessive use of the WHILE loop (Merrill Aldrich) INSERT ... EXEC (Merrill Aldrich) The use of stored procedures where a view is sufficient (Merrill Aldrich) Not using two-part object names (Merrill Aldrich) Using INSERT INTO without specifying the columns and their order (Merrill Aldrich) Full outer joins even when they are not needed. (Plamen Ratchev) Huge stored procedures (hundreds/thousands of lines). Stored procedures that can produce different columns, or order of columns in their results, depending on the inputs. Code that is never used. Complex and nested conditionals WHILE (not done) loops without an error exit. Variable name same as the Datatype Vague identifiers. Storing complex data  or list in a character map, bitmap or XML field User procedures with sp_ prefix (Aaron Bertrand)Views that reference views that reference views that reference views (Aaron Bertrand) Inappropriate use of sql_variant (Neil Hambly) Errors with identity scope using SCOPE_IDENTITY @@IDENTITY or IDENT_CURRENT (Neil Hambly, Aaron Bertrand) Schemas that involve multiple dated copies of the same table instead of partitions (Matt Whitfield-Atlantis UK) Scalar UDFs that do data lookups (poor man's join) (Matt Whitfield-Atlantis UK) Code that allows SQL Injection (Mladen Prajdic) Tables without clustered indexes (Matt Whitfield-Atlantis UK) Use of "SELECT DISTINCT" to mask a join problem (Nick Harrison) Multiple stored procedures with nearly identical implementation. (Nick Harrison) Excessive column aliasing may point to a problem or it could be a mapping implementation. (Nick Harrison) Joining "too many" tables in a query. (Nick Harrison) Stored procedure returning more than one record set. (Nick Harrison) A NOT LIKE condition (Nick Harrison) excessive "OR" conditions. (Nick Harrison) User procedures with sp_ prefix (Aaron Bertrand) Views that reference views that reference views that reference views (Aaron Bertrand) sp_OACreate or anything related to it (Bill Fellows) Prefixing names with tbl_, vw_, fn_, and usp_ ('tibbling') (Jeremiah Peschka) Aliases that go a,b,c,d,e... (Dave Levy/Diane McNurlan) Overweight Queries (e.g. 4 inner joins, 8 left joins, 4 derived tables, 10 subqueries, 8 clustered GUIDs, 2 UDFs, 6 case statements = 1 query) (Robert L Davis) Order by 3,2 (Dave Levy) MultiStatement Table functions which are then filtered 'Sel * from Udf() where Udf.Col = Something' (Dave Ballantyne) running a SQL 2008 system in SQL 2000 compatibility mode(John Stafford)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >