<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Developer hearted / Relational minded : SQL Server</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx</link><description>Tags: SQL Server</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>(Log) resistance is futile – how to drop log files</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/09/18/log-resistance-is-futile-how-to-drop-log-files.aspx</link><pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:22:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9896976</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9896976.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9896976</wfw:commentRss><description>At the beginning everyone is trying to tune the database by creating additional database files, spreading the data across file groups, adding additional log files for the database… But wait a minute, is there a performance benefit from having more than...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/09/18/log-resistance-is-futile-how-to-drop-log-files.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9896976" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/attachment/9896976.ashx" length="2883" type="application/octet-stream" /><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category></item><item><title>The “magic” about trustable relationships with NULL and NOT IN</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/05/25/the-magic-about-trustable-relationships-with-null-and-not-in.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 22:52:27 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9640794</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9640794.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9640794</wfw:commentRss><description>&amp;#160; As a follow-up to my former post “ Why you shouldn't´trust the friendship of NULL and the (NOT) IN predicate ” I asked Paul Randal during our SQL Server Master training about the possible internal reason that the results can vary if you have NULL...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/05/25/the-magic-about-trustable-relationships-with-null-and-not-in.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9640794" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/T-SQL/default.aspx">T-SQL</category></item><item><title>Getting feedback / progress from batches and stored procedures</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/05/11/getting-feedback-progress-from-batches-and-stored-procedures.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 12:42:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9602156</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>5</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9602156.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9602156</wfw:commentRss><description>Ever wanted to get feedback and interim results like a progress from a stored procedure ? Well, not that easy as the results such as PRINT information is send after the batch has been completed. If you want to get information back from your batches you...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/05/11/getting-feedback-progress-from-batches-and-stored-procedures.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9602156" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/attachment/9602156.ashx" length="57232" type="application/x-zip-compressed" /><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/.Net/default.aspx">.Net</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/ADO.NET/default.aspx">ADO.NET</category></item><item><title>A long (but not missed) friend revisited, prefixing stored procedures with SP_</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/04/28/a-long-but-not-missed-friend-revisited-prefixing-stored-procedures-with-sp.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:59:56 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9573121</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>2</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9573121.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9573121</wfw:commentRss><description>Coming as a simple sample with PBM (creating a policy with a condition that procedure names shouldn't´t start with SP_) and getting an interesting question in one of my classes, I wanted to revisit the question about the yet in some places existing naming...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/04/28/a-long-but-not-missed-friend-revisited-prefixing-stored-procedures-with-sp.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9573121" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/T-SQL/default.aspx">T-SQL</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/Performance/default.aspx">Performance</category></item><item><title>Who2 wants to process sp_who2 ?</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/04/03/who2-wants-to-process-sp-who2.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:12:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9530851</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9530851.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9530851</wfw:commentRss><description>SP_who2 has become a very handy tool for administrator, DBAs developers or all who are the All-In-One role) to get information from the processes table and get the appropriate information by just issuing this command form the command line. Easy if you...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/04/03/who2-wants-to-process-sp-who2.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9530851" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/attachment/9530851.ashx" length="2427" type="application/octet-stream" /><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/DMV/default.aspx">DMV</category></item><item><title>TDS Protocol Versions meet client stacks</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/03/02/tds-protocol-versions-meet-client-stacks.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:59:18 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9453993</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/9453993.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=9453993</wfw:commentRss><description>A colleague (Cornel Sukalla) asked me what the protocol_version in sys.dm_exec_connections is all about. From the output it seems that its an INT presenting the version for the protocol used by the client. With some research and having in mind that those...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2009/03/02/tds-protocol-versions-meet-client-stacks.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9453993" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/Protocol/default.aspx">Protocol</category></item><item><title>Get all system databases of a server</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/07/16/get-all-system-databases-of-a-server.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:06:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8738139</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/8738139.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=8738139</wfw:commentRss><description>The easiest way for querying all system databases of a server is to assume that databases create by a user come with a database_id &amp;gt;= 5 in sys.databases. But the problem is that distribution databsaes will not be kept into this consideration. Therefore...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/07/16/get-all-system-databases-of-a-server.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=8738139" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/T-SQL/default.aspx">T-SQL</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SMO/default.aspx">SMO</category></item><item><title>Changing the Login / Authentication Mode programmtically via SMO</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/05/07/changing-the-login-authentication-mode-programmtically-via-smo.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 21:14:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8466439</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/8466439.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=8466439</wfw:commentRss><description>Here are some instructions how to change the Login / authentication mode via Code. It just uses plain SMO capabilites: After this you will have to make sure that the Service is restarted, if you want this to do via SMO look at the following sample. You...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/05/07/changing-the-login-authentication-mode-programmtically-via-smo.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=8466439" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/.Net/default.aspx">.Net</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SMO/default.aspx">SMO</category></item><item><title>Obfuscation is not a security feature – Spoofing the APP_NAME</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/05/06/obfuscation-is-not-a-security-feature-spoofing-the-app-name.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8462463</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>2</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/8462463.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=8462463</wfw:commentRss><description>SQL Server 2005 introduced an interesting and long demanded feature, the LOGON triggers. First only defined via server event triggers, it has become more and more popular in same scenarios to prevent users with a certain machine environment accessing...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/05/06/obfuscation-is-not-a-security-feature-spoofing-the-app-name.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=8462463" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/Custom+Security/default.aspx">Custom Security</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/T-SQL/default.aspx">T-SQL</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/.Net/default.aspx">.Net</category></item><item><title>Linq to SQL materials of the SQL Server Developer Conference (SEK) in Nürnberg</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/04/30/linq-to-sql-materials-of-the-sql-server-developer-conference-sek-in-n-rnberg.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:33:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8443399</guid><dc:creator>Jens K. Suessmeyer</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/comments/8443399.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/commentrss.aspx?PostID=8443399</wfw:commentRss><description>Thanks for the interesting SQL Server Developer conference of Karl Donabauer . Scripts and Demos are attached. Hope you enjoyed it and we´ll meet again :-) -Jens...(&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/2008/04/30/linq-to-sql-materials-of-the-sql-server-developer-conference-sek-in-n-rnberg.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=8443399" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/attachment/8443399.ashx" length="649739" type="application/x-zip-compressed" /><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2005/default.aspx">SQL Server 2005</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2000/default.aspx">SQL Server 2000</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx">SQL Server</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/jenss/archive/tags/SEK/default.aspx">SEK</category></item></channel></rss>