From: Matthew B. <mat...@ou...> - 2006-12-15 09:54:33
|
Peter Crowther wrote: >> From: Matthew Buckett Could you elaborate on this? I believe that >> all the installer looks for are tables. I don't think it does >> checking on constraint name. > > After I added some >30-character constraints in 2.4, you shortened > their names (the long names failed on PostgreSQL as I recall). In a > later upgrade script to 2.8, the constraints are referenced by their > shortened names. I'm not aware that Leeds ever ran anything to drop > the original (long named) constraints and get the shorter ones; I'm > not sure the change ever made its way into an upgrade script. You've got a better memory than me. I see on LogBookPage.sql there is a commit note that a database column was shorterned and looking at the diff it was but do you remember what the constraint that caused problems was? >> The code is mine. And I wasn't aware that MS SQL didn't support >> LIMIT/OFFSET. Is there an alternative way of paging SQL results in >> MS SQL? > > Not to my knowledge. You can select top n or top n%, but I'm not > aware of any paging support at all. Yeah, after a bit of digging it seems like you have to hack it: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnpag/html/scalenethowto05.asp -- Matthew Buckett |