about unstructured data analysis again~~

well...actually I just want to know a brief concept about using this tool to
analyze unstructured information. Does SQL server only apply for structured
information?if not, then what advantages can we get if we use this tool to
analyze unstructured data?Thanks again for your reply : )
No need to repost. Replied in your previous thread.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP

about unstructured data analysis again~~

well...actually I just want to know a brief concept about using this tool to
analyze unstructured information. Does SQL server only apply for structured
information?if not, then what advantages can we get if we use this tool to
analyze unstructured data?Thanks again for your reply : )No need to repost. Replied in your previous thread.
--
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||i'm really sorry about this.
i was just too eager to know the answer and i thought it may be no one
seeing my answer, so i post the same question repeatedly.sorry~~~
"David Portas" wrote:
> No need to repost. Replied in your previous thread.
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>
>

about unstructured data analysis again~~

well...actually I just want to know a brief concept about using this tool to
analyze unstructured information. Does SQL server only apply for structured
information?if not, then what advantages can we get if we use this tool to
analyze unstructured data?Thanks again for your reply : )No need to repost. Replied in your previous thread.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--

About implicit transactions in temp table

I have a .net program which usually create temp table in SQL Server 2005 and
populate it from com contrlol to apply later to the main table.But sometimes
I need to delete some of previously inserted rows to replace them with maybe
more and adjusted ones.
I did this by deleting suspicious rows and going back on com control to
inserting rows.
I did found that I am missing some rows.
It seems that deletion does not synchronized with consequenced insertions.
Is it neccessary to do explicit transaction or this is one of 2005
optimizations on temp tables?Hi
I am not really clear how you are doing this, maybe you would like to post
some sample code? If the com control has it's own connection then you may no
t
be using the same temporary table!
John
"UncleSam89" wrote:

> I have a .net program which usually create temp table in SQL Server 2005 a
nd
> populate it from com contrlol to apply later to the main table.But sometim
es
> I need to delete some of previously inserted rows to replace them with may
be
> more and adjusted ones.
> I did this by deleting suspicious rows and going back on com control to
> inserting rows.
> I did found that I am missing some rows.
> It seems that deletion does not synchronized with consequenced insertions.
> Is it neccessary to do explicit transaction or this is one of 2005
> optimizations on temp tables?|||It seems that it was my own bug
sorry
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> I am not really clear how you are doing this, maybe you would like to post
> some sample code? If the com control has it's own connection then you may
not
> be using the same temporary table!
> John
> "UncleSam89" wrote:
>

About implicit transactions in temp table

I have a .net program which usually create temp table in SQL Server 2005 and
populate it from com contrlol to apply later to the main table.But sometimes
I need to delete some of previously inserted rows to replace them with maybe
more and adjusted ones.
I did this by deleting suspicious rows and going back on com control to
inserting rows.
I did found that I am missing some rows.
It seems that deletion does not synchronized with consequenced insertions.
Is it neccessary to do explicit transaction or this is one of 2005
optimizations on temp tables?Hi
I am not really clear how you are doing this, maybe you would like to post
some sample code? If the com control has it's own connection then you may not
be using the same temporary table!
John
"UncleSam89" wrote:
> I have a .net program which usually create temp table in SQL Server 2005 and
> populate it from com contrlol to apply later to the main table.But sometimes
> I need to delete some of previously inserted rows to replace them with maybe
> more and adjusted ones.
> I did this by deleting suspicious rows and going back on com control to
> inserting rows.
> I did found that I am missing some rows.
> It seems that deletion does not synchronized with consequenced insertions.
> Is it neccessary to do explicit transaction or this is one of 2005
> optimizations on temp tables?|||It seems that it was my own bug
sorry
"John Bell" wrote:
> Hi
> I am not really clear how you are doing this, maybe you would like to post
> some sample code? If the com control has it's own connection then you may not
> be using the same temporary table!
> John
> "UncleSam89" wrote:
> > I have a .net program which usually create temp table in SQL Server 2005 and
> > populate it from com contrlol to apply later to the main table.But sometimes
> > I need to delete some of previously inserted rows to replace them with maybe
> > more and adjusted ones.
> > I did this by deleting suspicious rows and going back on com control to
> > inserting rows.
> > I did found that I am missing some rows.
> > It seems that deletion does not synchronized with consequenced insertions.
> > Is it neccessary to do explicit transaction or this is one of 2005
> > optimizations on temp tables?