Why is Aaron 'back'?

[aaron.kempf]

Hey.. just in case anyone was wondering about why I was 'back'?

It's because this thread.. Where the MVPs of the world gave _THREE_
pieces of false information about SQL Server.
--------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.access/browse_thread/thread/b6211000fc44ebcf/
--------------------------------------------------
Example #1
Actually, I STRONGLY suggest you avoid the identity field type in sql
server.

That is a HUGE multi GUID type field, and if you ever need to link a
sub-form (child table) to that table, you HAVE TO USE the SAME data
type of
identify in the CHILD table. (you can't use int, or bigInt).


That means you will use a identify type field in the child table
(it is a foreign key..and you have to set the field as non unique,
but you MUST use a type of identity here..and that is often
confusing to us access developers).
--------------------------------------------------
Aarons _FACTS_ - How can someone confuse 'uniqueidentifier' with
identity.. I just mean 'jeez'.

NO _WONDER_ there is so much mis-information out there-- especially
with the MVPs just randomly lying about SQL Server? This MVP called
out _THREE_ different datatypes and said 'holy crap whatever you do,
don't use these datatypes'.

And it's just blatantly not true.
--------------------------------------------------
Example #2
**** HOWEVER while the above is correct, you CAN NOT use bigInt as a
primary
key!!!
--------------------------------------------------
Aarons _FACTS_ - BigInt for PK is useful in a billion different
places. Why would this guy say that we CAN NOT use bigint as a pk?
--------------------------------------------------
Example #3
As someone recent pointed out, I don't see the need for a primary key
with a
range of:

-9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to 9,223,372,036,854,775,807.

The above is not billion, but in fact has a trillion record range.
There is
simply little, if any reason to use bigInt here....
--------------------------------------------------
Aarons _FACTS_ - uh that's sure not a trillion either. It's a
quintillion I believe. But the point of the matter is that this guy
_INCORRECTLY_ states why to never use 3 different datatypes.
--------------------------------------------------

In conclusion-- you MVP kids were demonstrating further false
information about SQL Server. I was coaxed out of a recent retirement
(I've been working in the marketing department at Microsoft; I didn't
have enough time to be out here).

I was coaxed out of (newsgroup) retirement... BECAUSE SOME MVP DUDE
LIED ABOUT SQL SERVER THREE TIMES IN ONE THREAD.

-Aaron

 

[Arvin Meyer [MVP]]

Hey.. just in case anyone was wondering about why I was 'back'?

It's because this thread.. Where the MVPs of the world gave _THREE_
pieces of false information about SQL Server.

1. The information you show comes from 1 MVP.
2. You did not read it carefully as clarifications were made to avoid any
confusion.
3. Had you carefully read the answers you *might* have understood what he
was trying to point out.

 

[aaron.kempf]

bullshit.

People come around here and spread more lies about SQL-- about how 'oh
my gosh it is SO much more complex'.

_GAG_ me with a spoon kid.

Mis-information like this will no longer be acceptable in my
newsgroups.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

No, there was never any confusing here...you just taking things out of
context...

--------------------------------------------------
Example #2
**** HOWEVER while the above is correct, you CAN NOT use bigInt as a
primary
key!!!

Once again, you taking things out of context. I NEVER claimed you can't
using bigInt as a PK, I said you can't use bigInt as a PK when using a odbc
linked table to ms-access. That is a grand canyon of a different statement.
Why
do you continue to lie and try to throw mud at people by using used car like
salesman's tricks to make the appearance of some grave errors on my part?
If I was wrong, or was corrected on my statements, I would not have the
slights issue on being corrected. I would be MOST glad to be corrected
on any of my posts I make. And, I would happy to do so in public
so others could learn even more from me.

I would simply state, sure...no problem, I appreciate being corrected on
this issue. However, I was not wrong, and the above statement was not that
you
can't use bigInt as a PK, but you can't use one as a linked odbc table to
ms-access. (you likely can get a linked view to work in this case, but that
not the point being made).

Example #3
As someone recent pointed out, I don't see the need for a primary key
with a
range of:

-9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to 9,223,372,036,854,775,807.

The above is not billion, but in fact has a trillion record range.
There is
simply little, if any reason to use bigInt here....
--------------------------------------------------
Aarons _FACTS_ - uh that's sure not a trillion either. It's a
quintillion I believe. But the point of the matter is that this guy
_INCORRECTLY_ states why to never use 3 different datatypes.
--------------------------------------------------

I did not use the word "never", and I simply stated that for the most part,
a long number (in jet/ms-access), or int in sql server is adequate for most
applications. The idea that one would "never" use bigInt is insane as to why
then would bigInt be a feature of sql server? Once again, you are trying to
spin things like a used car salesman in a feeble attempt to throw mud at
people here. It is just laughable that you trying to suggest I never said
anyone needs bigInt...you make a public fool of yourself if you actually
think other people are that stupid. however, your public questing and
disparagement of people shows a consistent lack of respect of people here,
and a constant attempt to state that others here are stupid, and you are
smart. Kind of sad that you don't really want to spend your time here
helping this community, but only spend LARGE efforts to throw mud at people
here. so sad you have to be this kind of person here.

I stand public and strong in all of those statements I made in that post,
and furthermore am 100% willing and open to clarify any parts of the
statements I made.

Also, kind of funny that you attack me and my statements, but fail to quote
the original post, or even the fact that it was me you are talking about in
this post. I am 100% open to helping the community here, and I am open to
any kind of change on my part that will help people and this access
community.

You certainly not showing any respect for this community at all here....

These types of posting from you is going to get you
in trouble here again. However, I still wish you all the best...

 

[Arvin Meyer [MVP]]

The ONLY misinformation I've seen is that which you've spread. Go play in
the SQL-Server groups because you sure don't know much about Access or JET.
I guess there's not too much hope for you. I won't be wasting any more of my
time with you.

PLONK
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
http://www.accessmvp.com

bullshit.

People come around here and spread more lies about SQL-- about how 'oh
my gosh it is SO much more complex'.

_GAG_ me with a spoon kid.

Mis-information like this will no longer be acceptable in my
newsgroups.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[aaron_kempf]

because I sure don't know Access or Jet?

I won't strand for this mis-information

You cannot attempt to discredit me with a straight face.
I know my shit.

Some dipshit said 'oh don't use these three datatypes'

Screw that-- I'll stand up for SQL Server, on every corner.
I will no longer let you jerks bully me into submission.

Sorry-- Just because everyone here is stuck in the 80s-- that doesn't
mean it's right.

-Aaron

 

[aaron_kempf]

Albert;

I strongly disagree. You cannot say I mis-interpreted anything.
Identity should not be used as keys? How is it that I mis-interpreted
that? You made another statement-- bigints CAN NOT be used as a
primary key. That is entirely false.

Did I mis-interpret both of them?

You sound an awful lot like my girlfriend. You say three wrong
things.. I mean; it is 180 degrees from being correct.. and then you
accuse me of mis-interpreting them.

You didn't preface it with 'regarding linked tables'.
You said you CAN NOT used big ints as keys.

You said 'OH MY GOODNESS, DO NOT USE IDENTITY'. How many careers have
you stunted with mistakes like this?

How about 'if you don't know SQL Server then don't talk shit to people
that do know it'.
How about 'if you don't know SQL Server then don't talk shit to people
that are trying to educate the kids still stuck in the 80s'.

Does that sound like a good idea?

I don't like linked tables; I won't use linked tables-- sounds to me
like it's a problem with linked tables-- not a problem with SQL
Server.

I keep track of my server name-- and my database name-- in one single
place.
And presto- chango-- all of my databases automagically can talk to
each other because they automatically link to each other.

I mean _WOW_.

If I want to run a SQL statement at 8pm every night?

It's _SUPER_ easy it is called a job. Access kids have been
reinventing that wheel for _WAY_ too long.

Honestly. I've used Access Data Projects for years.. and I've never
had a problem with big int primary keys.

ADP is a better environment- easier, better; more powerful; cheaper--
ADP is a better environment for all reasons. ADP supports
replication. ADP supports 'the future'. ADP supports VPN and Wireless
and Dual Core. ADP supports every operating system. ADP supports
'index tuning wizard' or ADP supports 'dynamic management views' or
ADP supports 'real ETL tools'.

ADP supports 'gigabytes, terabytes of data'.

I worked on a 4.5 tb database 5 years ago. 100gb of new data every
day; 300 million new rows.. per day.

I tell you-- having an integer key for that-- wouldn't last very
long. That's why I objected to you saying that you CAN NOT use bigint
as a key.

Access MDB doesn't have a single advantage. Not a single advantage.
It's not easier to use-- it's not cheaper..
Well-- maybe the 'name of the product' MIcrosoft Access has less
letters than Microsoft SQL Server.

I guess you might consider that an advantage. Maybe someone could
save some ink in a book by saving those extra 4 letters.

Sorry.

I'm just not going to let you blame it on me.. saying that I mis-
interpreted anything.
I didn't mis-interpret anything.

You're just not educated enough to wash my feet. And you're not
educated enough to help people make the right decision when it comes
to SQL Server vs Access.

Good Luck

-Aaron

 

[aaron_kempf]

And for the record?? I'm showing plenty of respect.

You're the jerk that is giving false information three times in one
post-- and then blaming it on me.

-Aaron

 

[David W. Fenton]

The ONLY misinformation I've seen is that which you've spread. Go
play in the SQL-Server groups because you sure don't know much
about Access or JET.

He'll get roundly criticized in the SQL Server groups, too, since
most of the time the things he says about SQL Server are wrong (or
hopelessly incomplete or overstated).

I guess there's not too much hope for you. I won't be wasting any
more of my time with you.

I'm surprised you didn't killfile him long ago. If it weren't for
everyone replying to him, I'd never have seen his re-appearance in
these parts.

Knowing the background as I do now, I see it as a really sad
situation, to be honest. I'm not sure that any of us can do anything
to help, but I vastly admire the respect for privacy that Aaron has
been shown by the denizens of this newsgroup. Too bad Aaron doesn't
show any respect in return.

 

[aaron.kempf]

David;

That is neither true; nor a good tactic.

I'm damn good with SQL Server. And I'm damn good with Access.
But because I've got a clue; I graduated from MDB to ADP a decade ago.

-Aaron

 

[PMK]

I find these groups very helpful for any Access information I require.

I cannot see any purpose in you recommending your favourite programme or
saying that it can do any and all problems that people are experiencing when
they have immediate issues with the programme they are using now; are they
simply going to stop using access that second and go out and buy whatever it
is you perpetually drone on about? No, I don't think so either.

So, if you're as experienced in access as you say you are, please offer
solutions and not advertising. I for one look at the number of replies each
thread has expecting to see in depth discussion regarding the problem and
solutions offered by the excellent MVP's. However, whenever your name is
displayed, I close it as you offer nothing of any substance.

Yours in the cause of seeing less of you!

PMK

And for the record?? I'm showing plenty of respect.

You're the jerk that is giving false information three times in one
post-- and then blaming it on me.

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

PMK;

I am so friggin sorry-- that these dipshits around here have convinced
you to use a unreliable database.

Sorry-- but I will not be bullied into submission.

The -FACTS- of the matter is that SQL Server is free, free, free,
free, free.
So I never asked you to run out and buy anything.

What I have asked for-- is the polite ability to reccomend SQL Server-
where I see fit- without getting stalked by 20 people.

I don't need your personal attacks. The MVPs around here are idiots.
Did you not see the post where that MVP posted _THREE_ false things
about SQL Server?

When the MVPs can't even get datatypes _CORRECT_ on SQL Server?

It's a MVP problem.. not a SQL Server problem.

Thanks

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

Hey Asshole

Where was I -EVER- wrong about SQL Server?

You're the dipshit that is reccomending that people use Access
replication.. until-- wait for it-- wait for it

OH SHIT THEY DON'T SUPPORT REPLICATION ANY LONGER!

-Aaron