EditorsBlog - All Comments

re: Google Scanning Project

meirbarlev — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 08:55:04 GMT

i would be vary carefull when letting one entity control access to out of print books. I can think of a lot of good reasons for it, but i worry about the power it will provide the ones who would abues it. they could falsly direct us (common readers) to whatever they want us to seeqread, they could hide info from us and all sorts of devious things. I would rather NOT do it then DO it. the bad outweighs the good in this case.

re: SQL Server 2008 SP1

vplmega — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:26:54 GMT

SQL Server 2008 Administration in Action focuses the production DBA, digging deep into the various tasks specific to that role. Expert author Rod Colledge--check him out at sqlCrunch.com--teaches you best practices that cover the lifecycle of a SQL Server system, including infrastructure design, installation, and operational maintenance. And while many of these techniques will work in any recent version of SQL Server, you'll find full coverage of emerging SQL Server 2008 best practices.good article, i really like it. I am doing a bit on research about SQL Server 2008 SP1 and i found also macrotesting www.macrotesting.com to be very good source. Thanks for you article.....

re: SQL Server 2008 SP1

Dix — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:15:09 GMT

Hello,

I have installed a SQL Server 2008 on Windows 2008 Server 64bit. Server has 140GB hard disk and 6GB memory.

Windows Server is running on virtual machine (VMware Server)

The old Server was Windows 2003 with SQL Express.

I note that Windows 2003 + SQL Express is running better than my new server.

Any idea? What can I do to make better my new file server?

Other question: my database is 4GB file. Can I put entire 4GB file in memory? It´s possible? How can I do it?

Thanks

Recent Links Tagged With "09f9" - JabberTags

Recent Links Tagged With "09f9" - JabberTags — Sun, 17 May 2009 10:04:13 GMT

Pingback from Recent Links Tagged With "09f9" - JabberTags

re: Life Changing Technology

mhaskins — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 20:35:27 GMT

These technologies are not new - but they are many of my favourites: dishwasher, washing machine, clothes dryer, microwave, automobile. These fantastic technologies have a definite impact on my life.

;)

re: Google Scanning Project

pward — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:57:13 GMT

I think the point that was being made by the librarians in this radio article was that if only one entity where to control access to out of print books then it would be a monopoly free from economic competition

re: Google Scanning Project

willlamers — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:41:36 GMT

i would not say that they would control access to out-of-print material, I say they would provide one additional source of finding that material. Controlling access would indicate to me that they would be the only source for that information. If that information is not currently available to a library and Google provides it, that would not be a bad thing.

Just because a book is out of print does not mean it cannot be purchased. However, the library has to work within it's budgetary constraints. Purchasing one old book that may never even be opened does not make financial sense, but being able to log on to Google and read it for free does...

re: Google Scanning Project

paultinnz — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:29:19 GMT

Hi Peter,

Sorry about this but I don't quite get what you are saying here! In particular, "will be provided to every public library project", what did you actually mean to say here?

re: Google Scanning Project

ehausig@wish.org — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:36:48 GMT

I think that the operative phrase is "out of print information." In my opinion, it is better that a single organization preserves information than no organization at all. (Ideally, multiple pubic and private entities would step up to the plate on this endeavor.) On a similar note, there was a recent NPR report about how the Library of Congress doesn't have the facility to store electronic documents, such as PDF and DOC files. It was interesting because a military researcher was interviewed and he said that he found a Mac that was going to be thrown away and it contained the only documented account of a Korean War battle. Because it was electronic in form the Library of Congress wouldn't store it. (Note: I am an NPR junkie. It's so much better than the high-definition manure on those 24-hour news channels. ;-)

re: Cell Phone Dependency

jerryhung — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:44:34 GMT

Add BlackBerry to the mix, when the US President depends on it

how did we all survive, life was much simpler

re: Why Upgrade?

zzzbla — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:13:49 GMT

It's true that there's more differentiation between the enterprise and the standard editions in SQL Server 2008.

Many enterprise oriented features are only available in the Enterprise Edition.

However, Policy based management and Performance data warehouse are available in all editions (PDW is not available in the express edition). Other features are available in other edition as well: log compression for mirroring is available in standard edition, all programmability features are available in all editions (new data types, hierarchyid, spatial, merge).

Most new BI stuff (SSIS, SSRS, SSAS) are also available in the standard edition as well.

I think that our primary target would be to upgrade the 2000 systems to 2008 and start new projects in 2008, and leave 2005 as they are if no new 2008 features are required, and upgrade them to the next new version.

re: What a Mess

Ayyappan — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 05:55:09 GMT

Hi,

This is very good comment for Microsoft development team.

Instead of rectifying the mistake they are creating new versions of the software.

People who are using their product must comeup and speak about it. we are doing it. this must reach all the dba's because they are eventual suffering for their mistakes.

Pages tagged "continual"

Pages tagged "continual" — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:33:43 GMT

Pingback from Pages tagged "continual"

re: Why Upgrade?

Hitesh Shah — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:02:27 GMT

This is true . Product life cycle for database is abt 5 yrs minimum . Releasing product like database 3 years will can give only new customer who are starting fresh and the old customer will not migrate automatically to new version especially when lot of technical and commercial difficulties (like the ones everyone is facing ) .

re: Why Upgrade?

zzx375 — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:46:17 GMT

Third party products may be certified on SQL 2005 but not on SQL 2008.

That is our situation.