"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews***@avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%23YQoecvKIHA.2176@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> About two years ago we had to deal quite heavily with DB2. DB2 is a
> monsterous mess. Having used SQL Server so long i felt like i was being
> tortured with DB2 and it's tools. i had a few back and forth conversations
> with a guy at IBM who was interested in making DB2 more appealing. i got
> to a list of about 40 issues.
>
> That's not to say that SQL Server and Enterprise Manager (yes Enterprise
> Manager) are not without it's problems. So in fairness i started recording
> the usability issues with SQL Server. It's now two years later, and i've
> decided to post what i have so far.
>
>
>
> SQL Server Issues List
> ===============
>
> 1. Database using in "Task Pad" view in Enterprise Manager is not always
> accurte. You must run
> EXECUTE sp_spaceused @UpdateUsage=True
> in order to get accurate numbers.
>
> Solution:
> Include a note on the page saying:
>     NOTE: Values shown may not be current. Click [here] to update
>                database usage statistics now (this may take a while to
> run).
>                For more information see "sp_spaceused" in the Books
> Online.
>
>
>
> 2. Modifying a table can cause views to return corrupt data until the view
> is refreshed.
>
> Solution:
> When modifying a table, implicitly call "sp_refreshview" on all affected
> views. At the very least show that a refresh view failed because the view
> references invalid columns, mark those views for a 'recompile', or warn
> that "the following views" may need to be refreshed.
>
>
>
> 3. Restoring a database to a server can lead to invalid mappings between a
> login and a user; requiring a call to
> EXECUTE sp_change_users_login 'Update_One', 'LoginName',
> 'DatabaseUserName'
>
> Solution: provide a more obvious representation of login-user mappings,
> with the users that have no login, and the logins that have no user.
>
>
>
> 4. When trying to restore a database to a new server, the database must be
> created first. But then the database by default will try to use the
> original filenames/paths for the MDF/LDF files. You have to manually enter
> the filename of the MDF/LDF of your newly created database. This remains
> the case even if you select "force restore over existing database"; it
> doesn't actually restore over the existing database.
>
> Solution:
> i. By default restore a backup into a database; use the current database
> files. Never use the original files stored with the backup.
> ii. Don't require that the database already exist, since those data/log
> files will be orphaned anyway.
> iii. Allow option to specify that the database files will be restored to
> the existing files, overwriting the current MDF/LDF of the already created
> database.
>
>
> 5. "String or binary data would be truncated. The statement has been
> terminated."
>
> Solution: Tell me which field, and optionally it's type, and ideally the
> data.
>
>
> 6. When scripting databases, it reverts every time to My Documents, rather
> than going to my current folder. Every time (when doing this one after the
> other) i have to browse to where i want them to go.
>
> Solution: Go to my "current" folder, or perhaps record where i last put
> them.
>
>
> 7. The script objects "Browse for Folder" dialog is very tiny, and is not
> resizable. (Combined with #6, this is very, very annoying.
>
> Solution: Use the Windows Browse for folder shell function that presents a
> more usable dialog.
>
>
> 8. If you run sp_ChangeUsersLogin, you must close and reopen Enterprise
> Manager or you will get non-sensical error messages.
>

"Norman Yuan" <NoAddr***@NoEmail.fake> wrote in message
news:eFbDUiwKIHA.5764@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Add to your list for my most wanted feature from SQL Server
>
> an easy way to orgnize stored procedures, such as a structure similar to
> file system. So you can orgnize hundreds or thousands SPs used by
> different applications/purpose into a hierarchical folders.
>
> It is generally recommended to use SPs to control access to SQL Server by
> applications. It is not uncommon to have thousands of SPs in a database.
> So far, the only way for developer/DBA to easily know what a SP does is to
> name it meaningfully. Well, if you have tens of thousands of SPs, try to
> name them meaningfully and make the name being easily distinguashed. It is
> painful to scroll a long list to find a SP you know you wrote previously.
>
> I just wondering why such obviously missiing feature is still not there
> after using SPs being promoted for so long? Dare I hope SQL Server2008 has
> done something on this (if not, then it is too late to add it, I guess)?
>
>

"David Portas" <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dpor***@acm.org> wrote in message
news:%23Ivm9B3KIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> "Norman Yuan" <NoAddr***@NoEmail.fake> wrote in message
> news:eFbDUiwKIHA.5764@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Add to your list for my most wanted feature from SQL Server
>>
>> an easy way to orgnize stored procedures, such as a structure similar to
>> file system. So you can orgnize hundreds or thousands SPs used by
>> different applications/purpose into a hierarchical folders.
>>
>> It is generally recommended to use SPs to control access to SQL Server by
>> applications. It is not uncommon to have thousands of SPs in a database.
>> So far, the only way for developer/DBA to easily know what a SP does is
>> to name it meaningfully. Well, if you have tens of thousands of SPs, try
>> to name them meaningfully and make the name being easily distinguashed.
>> It is painful to scroll a long list to find a SP you know you wrote
>> previously.
>>
>> I just wondering why such obviously missiing feature is still not there
>> after using SPs being promoted for so long? Dare I hope SQL Server2008
>> has done something on this (if not, then it is too late to add it, I
>> guess)?
>>
>>
>
> You can achieve this already using a Visual Studio database project
> structure with subfolders. It would be very nice if Management Studio
> solution and project files were compatible with VS ones but unfortunately
> they aren't and SSMS projects don't allow subfolders. Microsoft would
> probably say that you should use VS and Team System for this functionality
> because that's their flagship tool for development and source control.
>
> --
> David Portas
>
>