http://www.sqlmag.com/authors/author/author/5300589/rsscomment/5300589en-USFri, 25 May 2012 11:02:30 GMTFri, 25 May 2012 11:02:30 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/performance/lab-report-litespeed-and-ultrabac#commentsAnchorThu, 15 Oct 2009 04:46:01 GMT
Old News 2004???]]>StephenThu, 15 Oct 2009 04:46:01 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/performance/lab-report-litespeed-and-ultrabac#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorSun, 08 Mar 2009 12:40:51 GMT
Now I have to check my db’s. :) Good article.]]>DAVIDSun, 08 Mar 2009 12:40:51 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-ado-uses-cursors#commentsAnchorWed, 03 Jan 2007 12:42:15 GMT
This is the best article I have read regarding the choice of cursors for typical program usage scenarios. The explanations of what is going on behind the scene is really what allows intelligent programmers to write robust and effecient code.]]>WILLIAMWed, 03 Jan 2007 12:42:15 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-ado-uses-cursors#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorTue, 30 May 2006 12:17:25 GMT
I apologize for the incomplete zip file--we inadvertently left out the nonpublished stored procedures but are adding those to the 48914.zip download file. It should be updated with the complete files shortly. --Anne Grubb, senior editor]]>AnneTue, 30 May 2006 12:17:25 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/packet-filtering/how-to-build-a-snort-server#commentsAnchorTue, 25 Apr 2006 08:42:09 GMT
good]]>asaTue, 25 Apr 2006 08:42:09 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/packet-filtering/how-to-build-a-snort-server#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorTue, 21 Mar 2006 09:50:46 GMT
Looks like a good article, but I dont have access to the source either....I have a current SQL Server Magazine subscription]]>NathanTue, 21 Mar 2006 09:50:46 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorWed, 08 Mar 2006 15:00:52 GMT
Where are the sp scrips? This is a hoax.]]>JasonWed, 08 Mar 2006 15:00:52 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorThu, 02 Mar 2006 08:30:42 GMT
Wondering if Author/editors ever read those comments?? If yes, then where is the whole Stored Proc???]]>CAROLYNThu, 02 Mar 2006 08:30:42 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorFri, 17 Feb 2006 15:54:37 GMT
Great article and great techniques, but where’s the beef? I am a Windows IT Pro subscriber and I don’t have access to the scripts either.]]>FREDFri, 17 Feb 2006 15:54:37 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorTue, 14 Feb 2006 08:46:54 GMT
So much for really wanting to help us!]]>RobertTue, 14 Feb 2006 08:46:54 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorTue, 14 Feb 2006 08:39:23 GMT
Do I really have to buy a different magazine to get the code for the artical in this magazine! That is extortion! That`s like Micrsoft holding back on knowledge base articals for Windows XP until I buy Office!]]>RobertTue, 14 Feb 2006 08:39:23 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorWed, 08 Feb 2006 20:03:19 GMT
I agree with the statements above, article is incomplete to the point of frustration. Seems like Bait and Switch.]]>BorisWed, 08 Feb 2006 20:03:19 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/performance/lab-report-litespeed-and-ultrabac#commentsAnchorTue, 07 Feb 2006 17:09:35 GMT
Good and useful information. I would add that I have recently removed LiteSpeed as a solution from three seperate clusters I am running. The problem that was encountered on all three clusters was the LiteSpeed backup of the transaction log spiked one processor and failed to complete the tran log backup blocking any backups of the db from completing. In each case the problem was discovered only when the transaction log ran out of space to grow. I would also add that on one of the clusters a memory leak was encountered that only stopped upon discontinued use of LiteSpeed.]]>MarcTue, 07 Feb 2006 17:09:35 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/performance/lab-report-litespeed-and-ultrabac#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorTue, 07 Feb 2006 15:57:13 GMT
Good article, it seems like a scam that I need to subscribe to Windows IT Pro to get the full SQL code when I am already a SQL Server Magazine subscriber.]]>MarcTue, 07 Feb 2006 15:57:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorFri, 03 Feb 2006 13:39:49 GMT
Hello: this article is missing the code.... And the code form the connecting article is incomplete. Winning the Fragmentation Battle]]>KenFri, 03 Feb 2006 13:39:49 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorFri, 03 Feb 2006 01:56:29 GMT
Enjoyed the article and got some great tips, but would appreciate the full stored procedure listing.]]>LeighFri, 03 Feb 2006 01:56:29 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorThu, 02 Feb 2006 14:12:25 GMT
Where is the Create Admin Database script?]]>RonThu, 02 Feb 2006 14:12:25 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorThu, 02 Feb 2006 14:10:10 GMT
I agree with the first review. It should be included with the SQL Server Magazine subscription.]]>RonThu, 02 Feb 2006 14:10:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorSun, 29 Jan 2006 14:40:35 GMT
It’s too bad that this sidebar article isn’t available to SQL Magazine subscribers (where the main article appears) and is instead only available to Windows IT Pro subscribers.]]>ROBSun, 29 Jan 2006 14:40:35 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/relevant-t-sql-stored-procedures#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorSat, 28 Jan 2006 14:42:07 GMT
Good article, but without some of the SProcs/scripts for access it doesn’t seem to help get a DBA started.]]>ROBSat, 28 Jan 2006 14:42:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorFri, 27 Jan 2006 11:48:19 GMT
How about all the code in the download area for the stored proc’s instead of just snips? Let’s make DBA even more productive and not make the fill in the blanks.]]>WILLIAMFri, 27 Jan 2006 11:48:19 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tsql3/winning-the-fragmentation-battle#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-ado-uses-cursors#commentsAnchorMon, 01 Aug 2005 06:45:10 GMT
I have a problem in use of ADO Dataset in Delphi. After allocation of a cursor(e.g. Open SELECT query) on SQL Server database, I couldnt deallocate opened cursor, unless I freed ADOConnection . How can I do this without connection freeing.]]>m-khorsandi,m-khorsandi Mon, 01 Aug 2005 06:45:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-ado-uses-cursors#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorSat, 19 Feb 2005 16:06:43 GMT
At the Microsoft ASP.NET, Jason M. Laurvick and some buddies traveled to Las Vegas. The event promised the latest and greatest information on your favorite development platform, ASP.NET! But instead, Laurvick and others went on a whacky search for the "American Dream". They were fueled by the massive amount of caffine and they set out in the dessert. Soon Laurvick and others encountered police, reporters, gamblers, racers, and hitchhikers; their search for some undefinable thing know only as the "American Dream" and they found fear, loathing and hilarious adventures into the dementia of the modern American West. Some of the practical sessions on ASP.NET and Visual Studio 2005 were interesting, but other than this ...neither Laurvick nor the others would recommend it. Laurvick says "Learn online and save yourself the hassles." ]]>Anonymous User Sat, 19 Feb 2005 16:06:43 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorThu, 25 Nov 2004 17:35:04 GMT
I need general objective questions and answers related to computers ]]>Anonymous User Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:35:04 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorMon, 22 Nov 2004 15:29:13 GMT
I Use Linux and my company just has Linux boxes too. Two years ago we had plenty of MS XP and 1 redhat Linux 9.. Now we have 12 machines.There is not one single windows here* Sometimes the question must be made like this: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Question: WHY DO THEY NEED M$ WINDOWS ?? Answer THEY DON’T IF THEY KNEW A GOOD ALTERNATIVE. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Coment: AND LINUX IS INDEED THE BEST, THE MOST SECURE, FASTER, UNBUGGED, STYLISH ALTERNATIVE. TRY IT AND YOU WON’T REGRET IT. BELIEVE ME!!]]>Anonymous User Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:29:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-june-29-2001#commentsAnchorSat, 10 Jul 2004 13:35:28 GMT
People who want to learn subneting,they should read this artical.]]>javSat, 10 Jul 2004 13:35:28 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-june-29-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-to-use-activex-data-object#commentsAnchorSun, 25 Apr 2004 16:13:10 GMT
Great article! Especially for a beginner VB6 programmer like me]]>LEHMAN FROM PHILIPPINES Sun, 25 Apr 2004 16:13:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/activex/how-to-use-activex-data-object#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/what-s-new-#commentsAnchorMon, 23 Feb 2004 09:52:34 GMT
Hi Thank you for taking attention to this letter. I am a student in electronic servicing lvl1, 1 of my friend who have finished is study and work now gave me your address. I need some information about how to repair and apdete a pc, I need some information from you if possible. Thank you.]]>FRANCK YABA Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:52:34 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/what-s-new-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorSun, 16 Nov 2003 00:29:51 GMT
tcp/ip version 4.0 betweeen different tcp/ip version 6.0]]>alexSun, 16 Nov 2003 00:29:51 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorSat, 02 Aug 2003 07:54:25 GMT
philip, it is a tough one for me too. and i think it is because i tend to add more detail in my mind when questions are vague. but i can see if i draw out the segments with the router hops in between as they are described the answers is clear. 192.26.33.0 Router 192.45.27.0 router 192.33.101.0 router 6.0.0.0]]>albert barrientos Sat, 02 Aug 2003 07:54:25 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/mcsd-net-worth-the-trouble-#commentsAnchorMon, 30 Sep 2002 08:45:36 GMT
Morris Lewis is obviously out of touch with reality. In his article "MCSD.NET--Worth the trouble?" he spends more time whining about what the MCSD.NET doesn’t cover than actually addressing what the cert is all about. Unlike the MCSE, you actually have to study to pass the MCSD exams and know your stuff. Testing a candidate on how to stop theft of data might be necessary when interviewing for a job at RSA or Verisign, but the average application developer doesn’t need it. Developers are not and shouldn’t be as knowledgable as network administrators when it comes to network security. His contention that they should only serves to illustrate his ignorance of what it is that programmers actually do. A person with as many certs as he has should know better.]]>Scott Walker Mon, 30 Sep 2002 08:45:36 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/mcsd-net-worth-the-trouble-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/is-quality-job-one-#commentsAnchorFri, 21 Jun 2002 12:37:58 GMT
"the reality is that just about anyone can show you how to create a new user account or set NTFS permissions" This is absolutely wrong! Very few instructors know the correct strategies for creating a folder structure and setting NTFS v5 permissions. In fact, very few books address this issue. The concepts of explicit /inherited permissions and deny/allow permissions and how exceptions to inheritance are handled is almost never addressed – even in books and magazine articles. As technologies become more sophisticated and complex the mile-wide, inch-deep approach to training is very ineffective.]]>Byron W. Putman Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:37:58 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/is-quality-job-one-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/sharing-your-expertise#commentsAnchorFri, 17 May 2002 21:21:58 GMT
I looked for the survey and couldn’t find it. Am I missing something?]]>Terry Burt Fri, 17 May 2002 21:21:58 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/sharing-your-expertise#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/encryption2/certifiable-q-a-for-december-1-2000#commentsAnchorFri, 03 May 2002 10:34:58 GMT
Comment to article “Certifiable Q&A for December 1, 2000” - Answer to Question 3” Setting only the push replication on one end and the pull replication on the other end will create the one-way replication path. The proposed solution will minimize the replication traffic, but it never allow for replicating the changes from the branch office to the central office. Consequently, the changes from one branch office will never be replicated to any other branch offices.]]>Jack HIbner Fri, 03 May 2002 10:34:58 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/encryption2/certifiable-q-a-for-december-1-2000#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/systems-administrator/data-types-revealed#commentsAnchorWed, 24 Apr 2002 18:01:07 GMT
How can i create complex Data Type in SQL 2000 like holding Employee Data(Name, position ,city, etc) & how will i access(Store & retrieve) values to this data type using SQL statement & from Front End Using ADO]]>Naunihal Singh Sidhu Wed, 24 Apr 2002 18:01:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/systems-administrator/data-types-revealed#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/configuration/you-can-take-it-with-you#commentsAnchorSat, 23 Mar 2002 16:49:04 GMT
Hi, I was woundering if someone can help me with the following error message. I have installed Windows CE Development tools and Windows SQL Server CE etc + set-up replication. I am using the emulator as i do not have a pocket pc yet. But i keep getting the following error message Source: Micosoft SQL Server 2000 Windows CE Edition Number: 80070005 Native Error: 0 Description: Run Param = 0 Param = 0 Param = 0 Param = Param = Param = Any help would be greatly appreciated. Allan]]>AndreySat, 23 Mar 2002 16:49:04 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/configuration/you-can-take-it-with-you#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/keeping-up-with-the-black-hats#commentsAnchorSun, 17 Mar 2002 20:19:44 GMT
I agree it’s a good idea, and so does Cisco. The author apparently is either not certified by Cisco or recently certified by Cisco. Cisco’s recertification process is relatively new except for the CCIE recertification requirement which has been in place for at least 2 years. However, anyone who has held a Cisco certification for more than a year has been inundated with noticification of recertification requirements and dates. If you hold a Cisco certification and haven’t been notified, the info is readily available at http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/10/wwtraining/ which does not require any login privileges.]]>Dave Milner Sun, 17 Mar 2002 20:19:44 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/keeping-up-with-the-black-hats#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/net-framework2/trends-for-2002#commentsAnchorSun, 10 Mar 2002 18:27:40 GMT
The company I work for just went belly up, and I am now an unemployed software engineer. The market is terrible! I spent my spare time in the last year learning .NET very well, but there are very few .NET jobs. I’ve applied for about 20 jobs, with no positive response. I am an MCSE, MCSD and b.sci computer science, with 7 years work experience, but soon I will be driving a taxi!]]>Joshua Reuben Sun, 10 Mar 2002 18:27:40 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/net-framework2/trends-for-2002#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/maximizing-job-security#commentsAnchorFri, 14 Dec 2001 16:41:09 GMT
Now this is what’s wrong with the certification program... The premise of certifications is that if you’re good, you can pass exams and prove it. The reality is "if you can cram for a few exams, you can pass yourself off as a highly experienced professional." What a bunch of crap. Some developer is going to knock of a couple database exams and think he’s a DBA? That makes the certification worthless for differentiating knowledgeable DBAs from people who can pass a few tests. What’s the point of getting certified if you’ll then be lumped in with a bunch of hacks...]]>David Farquhar Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:41:09 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/training-and-certification2/maximizing-job-security#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/visual-basic-vb/animal-farm-net#commentsAnchorTue, 23 Oct 2001 17:56:10 GMT
Give a better insight onto what exactly the .Net is trying to establish.]]>Chris Runciman Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:56:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/visual-basic-vb/animal-farm-net#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/antivirus/finding-a-cure-for-the-common-virus#commentsAnchorTue, 02 Oct 2001 10:46:31 GMT
From the commentary, "And because we really don’t have the time to learn proper security techniques through trial and error, we’ll have to rely on training." Are these really the only two possibilities that the author can envisage to deal with these problems? Have all other information resources really been reduced to mere trial and error? I doubt it, and this attempt to scare people into feeling that only training can provide competence is unworthy of the balanced coverage usually found in this publication.]]>Francis Harvey Tue, 02 Oct 2001 10:46:31 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/antivirus/finding-a-cure-for-the-common-virus#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/visual-basic-vb/animal-farm-net#commentsAnchorWed, 19 Sep 2001 11:39:06 GMT
.net certainly will change your life in IT. it’s going to make it a living Hell. The reason that programmers will switch is because they just swich to whatever MS comes out with, regardless of how good it is. It’d be nice if all the IT types would actuall sit back and listen to what people really think about these things. The end users *don’t want* all the annoying, privacy-invading features of .net on their desktop. But IT departments everywhere are gong to adopt it gung-ho because for some reason, they think it’s going to make their lives easier. If they want that, why don’t they all just go back to running DOS machines and exchange files with floppy disks? That certainly is much more reliable than today’s networking technology. Another point... the author of the article makes it sounds like a Godsend that MS wants to port .net to other platforms. We don’t want it! I happen to like how OS X works *without* MS trying to XP-ify my G4. I don’t want user tracking and rights management and all the crap that will eventually come with XP to find its way onto my computers. If I remember Animal Farm correctly, this utopian state was quite opressive. Hmm. Sounds familar? Well, soon all you IT types will learn why the rest of us call Microsoft "Big Brother"]]>Jim Champlin Wed, 19 Sep 2001 11:39:06 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/visual-basic-vb/animal-farm-net#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorThu, 23 Aug 2001 07:28:22 GMT
The correct answer to question 2 is A. The question refers to a "statement" not statements. Do you ever leave a test wondering if you were right, and the "correct" answer was wrong?]]>Joe Ahmann Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:28:22 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
I read your article about certification. I currently hold all three of Microsoft’s premium certifications (MCSE, MCDBA and MCSD). In each case while pursuing the certification the work I was doing revolved around the certification choice. My feeling about certification is that they are roughly equivilent to a course at college. Read a book take a test. I can talk knowledgeable about all aspects of a subject. In conjunction with experience I don’t know how you can beat someone having some certification. The timeline to certification probably gives a better overall picture of how someone is acquiring the certification.

Just some thoughts. I liked your article.]]>Bruce Szabo Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
Lewis I just read your COMMENTARY and wanted to add my little thought. I have been working with computers sense 1981 and have grown with PC’s. I have taken most of the MS certification classes over the years. I learned a great deal through the classes, but I have a real problem when trying to take tests. Even if I know the subject, if the questions are not completely to the point or too wordy I will miss them. I have a learning disability that causes me to miss read long questions, or multiple answered questions.

I do not let that stop me from being the number one Tech person wherever I go. I am working very hard at this time again to get my MCSE 2000. I am now a supervisor of desktop services at SAIC in Oak Ridge, TN. and have several that have their MCSE NT. Mostly because they can study the material available and take the tests. They do not have the abilities that being certified should stand for. Experience wins out. I have written you several times but deleted them. You may delete this message also I know, but that is fine. I just wanted you to know that there are Techs out here that can take care of their customers better than certified one, but may never get certified themselves. I will keep trying.

Thanks for your time and commentaries.]]>Jay Vincent Stephens Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
HI Morris

"Everyone I’ve asked has said that companies want to hire competent people, not good test takers."

I must take issue with that statement. Granted there are good engineers that are not good test takers but in general, a good test taker makes for a good engineer (provided they did not cheat). Test taking takes a certain degree of intelligence and reasoning and usually correpsonds with the ability to read on your own and digest information. That critical skill is lacking even among experienced engineers. Some engineers only can learn something through hands-on but the best engineers are equally adept at learning both through hands-on and through book learning.

I do not think that we short-change the engineers who do know how to pass a test (just because there are many that cannot). The experienced engineers that can pass those tests should get a few extra bucks than the others that cannot because they obviously have some extra learning skills.]]>Marc Hodies Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
Morris;

In the July 6 Training & Certification UPDATE you made some very good observations regarding MCSE/MCSD, and one BIG error. You stated the results you got had "nevertheless cause me concern about the state of Microsoft’s certification programs", and went on to say "the real blame falls squarely on the shoulders of those who have subverted the exams’ purpose by cramming instead of acquiring the skills that the exams seek to measure.

The real blame? I am an MCSE (NT) and fully intended to upgrade to Win2K MCSE after getting at least 1 year of experience prior to taking any exams. My shop is not yet fully upgraded to Win2K and won’t be for another 3-4 months. I don’t believe my situation is unusual. But here is my dilemma that I know is shared by many... If I don’t want my certification to expire then I MUST get my MCSE upgraded before Jan 1 2002 per Microsoft. So I don’t do it in my time, I don’t do it like you correctly suggest in your column, I don’t get experience, I cram and become the very thing that Microsoft and the rest of us don’t like - a paper MCSE. The real blame falls squarely on Microsoft. Let’s quit beating around the bush!

MCSE’s are not smart enough and don’t know enough about their own careers to make a decision on upgrading, we need Microsoft to make that decision for us. This will be the last time for me. The next time Microsoft decides I am no longer qualified because my certification is not on their most recent product, they can have their MCSE back! What is so wrong about being certified on a specific OS? If Microsoft keeps this agenda then what they will end up with is nothing but paper MCSE’s. Who in their right mind is going to continue chasing planned obsolescence? Take Microsoft’s’ stance on the TCP/IP exam as a case in point. They have discontinued and no longer recognize the TCP/IP exam as an elective. That would be understandable if no one was using TCP/IP anymore. So suckers like me get to take another elective and what for - the marketing dept at Microsoft? What’s this all about anyway, pushing products or identifying qualified engineers?

Perhaps a more accurate logo for those guys would read like this....

MICROSOFT - Where do WE want you to go today?]]>Jim McIntyre Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
Morris,

Your article on certification was absolutely correct but it didn’t go far enough on the ultimate impact. I am an excellent case in point. My original certification was as a CNE (Hey - remember Novell?) I started out with Netware 3.11 and kept the certification current through 2 iterations. However, I have now dropped it. Why? Because I did not use Netware 5.x on a daily basis and was unlikely to ever do so. I run my own test lab and could have easily prepped for and passed the exam, but decided that frankly it wasn’t honest to claim to be an expert on a product I never used.

While that is ancient history, the point is I and a lot of people like me see Microsoft following in and expanding on Novell’s path. Novell required upgrade certification when a new release came out. Microsoft requires complete recertification. Of course MCSEs are going to have to do exam dumps. It is the only way they can keep up. Again, I am probably in a better position than a lot of network professionals. I own a 15 system test LAN; but since I don’t use Win2K on the job yet, I will still use the exam dumps to help prep.

My office though is pretty typical. We won’t move to Win2K until December and if Microsoft keeps shoving Win XP, I’ll probably be recommending we delay for an additional 6 months and just go to XP. I’ll hardly be an expert on either XP or Win2K by then either, but you can bet I’ll have to upgrade my certification and then upgrade it again for Net.

Where is all this going? First, a lot of administrators I know say there company is waiting to see what the final product version is before they go through the cost of upgrading. Second, at some point either Microsoft runs out of new variations on the same theme, or most of us will run out of money for exams. A hundred bucks a clip adds up very fast for a working engineers who have to pay for their own tests. Third, Is Microsoft keeps putting non-job related questions in their exams, the value of those exams will continue to decline. For example, my daughter just passed the Win2K Pro exam. She said at least 5 of the questions focused on installation switches. I had the same experience when I took the NT Workstation exam a few years a go. Guess what - I’ve never used more than 2 of the switches and I’ll bet Liz never uses any of them either. Her comment on the Server exam? I know the junk, but you never use any of the stuff they asked in the real world.

End Result - Certification for Microsoft will become meaningless and will NOT result in thousands of MCSEs urging their companies to move to the latest version of the product. Just the reverse in fact since in many cases, prepping for the exam shows the administrator all the product’s weaknesses as well as its strengths. As Novell discovered with Netware 3.11 - If people know what the alternatives are, sometimes they are smart enough to know they don’t need them.]]>Nita Nabors Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
I finish going to school for my NT MSCE about a year or two ago and now the NT cert is no good. Most of the training was how to pass the MCSE test, not how to administrator my domain. The instructors were all certified but had very little real life experience. Which is good if you want to pass a MCSE test, but was not good if you want to learn how to do something in the REAL world. I prefer reading up on the subject and then practice in a test lab.

I will go to MCSE training when my company offers it to me, but I will not try to get the Cert. There are to many Certifications today and most of them are useless.]]>Andrew Miller Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
Hello Morris,

You’ve said that the responsibility lands on the shoulders of those that use the "dump sites" to memorize exams rather than learning the material. In my opinion, this assertion is wrong. You then went on to mention some of the ridiculous questions that are on exams that even the most qualified veterans wouldn’t know...... It is THOSE questions that create the market for the dump sites.

I am a fifteen year veteran of Oracle DBA work. I plan on going "independent" soon so I’m thinking an Oracle DBA certificate will be a good marketing ploy, so I just took the first of five exams for Oracle certification. For preparation, I reread several books that were specifically oriented for preparation for the exam. I then took over a dozen practice exams that I obtained from Oracle. I averaged in the mid to high 90% for all the practice exams.

I then went to take the actual exam this past week...and I was blown away. I did pass... by the skin of my teeth. The fact is, much of the exam was questions of fairly obscure stuff that has little relevancy to the real world of an Oracle DBA.

Obviously my experience and the "published" preparation exams are not what it takes to get certified. What it takes are "brain dump" sites. I didn’t think I’d go that direction originally, but they have a new believer in me.

The people responsible for screwing up the value of certifications are the people who design the questions and certification program.]]>Mark@Sanderson.net Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorMon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMT
Morris,

In response to your commentary on whether cerification matters, I am an MCSE with a couple of years experience in the IT field. Prior to this I worked in management consulting and I have a Bachelor Degree in Engineering, so as you can understand I have a very eclectic collection of experience.

I completed my MCSE really at the wrong end of the Microsoft timescale. I did it to expand my industry experience and pursue my interest in IT. The skills that I have gained are just as relevant now as they were back then. I am really angry that I spent all of that money on training and effort in study and gaining experience for it to be flushed away by what I consider to be Microsoft’s money making machine.

The unfortunate thing is that I am looking for another job at the moment and although I have a wide range of experience, I am at that point where I have not had enough IT experience to move into a more senior position (without my certification) but I also have too much experience and I am too highly qualified to be considered for positions similar to that which I am in at the moment. That is the feedback from recruitment agencies that I have registered with anyway. It seems that I will have to use the leverage that the MCSE certification provides once more to land my next job. This of course means that I will have to upgrade.

I am a firm believer in having a balanced life i.e. study, work, play, family etc. It seems that I have only just finished the intense study from the NT4 MCSE and Microsoft very kindly want me to rearrange my life again to forget everything else and try to study my butt off and gain experience in a company that does not use Win 2k at the same time as trying to work full time and manage to pay the mortgage on my house, and maybe if I am luck I might get another job out of it.

So in response to whether certification matters, in an ideal world - no, but in real life - yes it matters for those struggling souls who are just trying to make a living and do a job well and maybe trying to take one step up the corporate ladder.]]>Kane Pryzibilla Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:38:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/conferences-and-trade-shows/certification-doesn-t-matter#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 06 Jul 2001 08:36:01 GMT
Your question # 2 is a perfect example of the poorly written example test questions I find in so many places as I study for exam 70-029.

I selected answer A as being correct because a view can not update multiple tables in one statement, and none of the other solutions completed the job.

You claim that answer C was correct, but it only provided part of the solution. Your reasoning then incorporated answer D into the solution, but there was no indication that this was a multiple choice question.

Therefore I feel that given this list of solutions, answer A is a correct answer to the question as stated.]]>Don Lewis Fri, 06 Jul 2001 08:36:01 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 15 Jun 2001 13:40:32 GMT
On question 3 you did’t specifiy that the different server and clients were configured with the addreses of their gateways. Since DHCP is not used, this information should be specified on all the machines manually. You can’t assume that all the systems will listen to the RIP2 updates to update their own routing tables I would say that the proposed solution achived nothing! Let me know if I’m wrong...]]>Michael Gootin Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:40:32 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 15 Jun 2001 11:20:01 GMT
Training and Certification Update, June 15 2001. Section 3. Certifiable. Question 3.

I disagree with your answer. Nowhere in the Proposed Solution did it list that FTP server software was installed or configured on any computer. The FTP command will not work without FTP server software.

Therefore I chose answer B.

Also, the second Optional Objective was too vague. I see from your answer that you intended the FTP commands to use host names ("FTP ") rather than IP addresses ("FTP 100.200.101.201"). But without specifying this, the reader could have thought you meant IP addresses.

I should mention that I rarely have any objections to your questions, and usually find them very useful. Keep up the good work.]]>DaveFri, 15 Jun 2001 11:20:01 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 15 Jun 2001 09:37:53 GMT
Question three on today’s answers neglects one thing. IIS is not specified for the NT server, so it would not allow FTP access.]]>Joe MacDuffie Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:37:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-15-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorTue, 05 Jun 2001 15:56:03 GMT
Regarding Question 2, June 1st, 2001

WINS is *not* a TCP/IP service. It’s a Microsoft invention, not part of the actual stack.

While the answer is correct, this is either a trick question; or propaganda for MS (if you’re cynical).

MS didn’t invent the Internet. WINS has nothing to do with the Internet. It’s used only on local LAN based machines. If it were truly "Internet" related, you’d be able to route it w/o going thru push/pull nonsense, no? :)]]>William Nova Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:56:03 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorSat, 02 Jun 2001 01:38:25 GMT
Confusing question for a newbie like me. My understanding was that 255.255.0.0 would do the job. I don’t understand the "bits" issue?]]>Chris Kelly Sat, 02 Jun 2001 01:38:25 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 01 Jun 2001 06:47:50 GMT
Question 1 should be re-worded to ask "What’s the maximum number of ’1’ bits you can have in your subnet mask..."

Answers A, B and C all provide enough room for the specified number of hosts.

Also, subnet masks always have 32 bits, it’s the number of ’1’ bits that changes. ]]>bruce redfern Fri, 01 Jun 2001 06:47:50 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/q-a-for-june-1-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorWed, 30 May 2001 12:33:15 GMT
I find online training to require greater concentration and focus than instructor led training. I have experienced online training using various bandwidth speeds and it definitely is easier on the student when faster downloading is available. Unfortunately there is an entire segment of the market in sparsely populated areas that have no access to DSL or Cable because the providers are not offering the service in these areas. The only alternative is ISDN or T-1 lines which are also prohibitvely expensive to small companies with few employees and small networks. I administer a network consisting of 2 servers, 30 workstations with 75 users. We share 4 dial-up accounts on 6 different analog lines. The local cable company has been telling us they will be offering service within 6 months since 1998. Online training is too time-consuming and costly when a student has to sit and wait for the content to appear on their monitor after they click the *Next* button. For the learning to be effective, the content must be rich and interesting but that means graphics and multi-media which results in longer download times and bored, unmotivated students.]]>Kevin Nally Wed, 30 May 2001 12:33:15 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorSun, 27 May 2001 23:28:07 GMT
On-line training isn’t "there" yet. It’s too slow (I have DSL connection)and it just doesn’t work for "hands on skills" type of training.]]>Chris Payne Sun, 27 May 2001 23:28:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/internet/trouble-in-paradise#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 18 May 2001 07:58:03 GMT
I dont understand the solution to question 2. I understand that a default gateway routing solution will only travel two hops. Whats to say that 192.26.33.0 is more then two hops away fro 6.0.0.0?? I dont see how it is any further away then 192.33.101.0. Could you point me to an article that explains this? Thanks for helping the confused!!]]>Philip Wightman Fri, 18 May 2001 07:58:03 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/tcpip/q-a-for-may-18-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorFri, 16 Mar 2001 05:21:54 GMT
In Answers to Train&Cert Update, I’d like to have an explanation, why other answers are NOT correct, e.g. in "http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=20314#Answers", Answer to Question 2: I don’t see why the last answer is’nt correct, too. Furthermore, Question 2 in the eMail seems to mention the wanted choices of answers, whereas the third answer is split into two in the above mentioned web-page]]>Lutz Dressler Fri, 16 Mar 2001 05:21:54 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-16-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-2-2001#commentsAnchorWed, 07 Mar 2001 01:59:20 GMT
Regarding you’re 3th question. Regarding Answer A: Getting your apps up in less then 5 minutes is a joke from a practical point of view to start with and the total time of unavailability depends on a lot of other factors (Size of DB’s, Domain size,). Just changing the IP Address on you’re standby server is not going to help you much to reach that objective. Even if your ODBC connections use IP Addresses for the server (very unlikely as it normally uses a SQL server name) it would take a considerable amount of time before the domain controllers would be synchronized. Normally, as indicated, the ODBC source would be the server name and not the IP address. As a result you have to rename the standby server first and when it is up again you have to rerun the SQL server 7.0 set-up again as the server name has been changed and SQL server does not change automatically. The above is very well documented in BOL. Regarding Answer B: Because you’ve changed the IP addresses the clients have to change the server name in the ODBC source name. So this answer should not be right. Note: The problem with a lot of MS questions is that they are not very clear (this is an understatement). In a lot of cases (see above) you have to question if the person, who made the question, has actually got any experience with the issue. As an MCSE and MCDBA I have done more than a few tests (without cheating but serious studying) and find a lot of the exam questions unclear or irrelevant. The end result of getting a MS qualification is that if people don’t cheat they will have a sound technical base to build upon.]]>Carl Neirynck Wed, 07 Mar 2001 01:59:20 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-server-70/certifiable-q-a-for-march-2-2001#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/terminal-services-security#commentsAnchorWed, 21 Feb 2001 16:26:06 GMT
Just read the Terminal Services Security article on the Security Administrator website. All good information.

One concept that I think was alluded to was the use of ’shared user folders’ in conjunction with the My Documents folder. I think I followed your line of thinking but for what it is worth, here is the scenario I normally recommend during a Term Services deployment:

- Set the Default Domain (or Terminal Server Users) Policy (GPO) to redirect the target location of the My Documents folder to another specified directory.-

For example: Win2K by default sets the target location for My Documents to ’C:\Programs & Settings\<%username%>\My Documents’. With a GPO, you could specify that every valid login to the domain or Terminal Server (farm) redirect to, say, ’\\someserver\users$\%username%. This would ideally be a file server somewhere else on the network who’s data are part of a nightly backup. Further assuming, that you have already created that directory on the appropriate server and have assigned the correct permissions to the users$ directory (Owner = Full Control, Admin = read, whatever...)

The result is, no matter what terminal server the user logs into (if you have more that one load-balanced, or the like...) their documents will be available to them within the Terminal Server session in the My Documents folder, are backed up in case of Terminal Server failure, and you don’t have to worry about splitting you files up between NT-home-directory-seeking applications with My Documents-seeking applications. Just have them all point to My Documents.

I hope that made some sense.]]>Joshua Leewarner Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:26:06 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/terminal-services-security#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dhcp2/certifiable-q-a-for-november-3-2000#commentsAnchorMon, 06 Nov 2000 12:31:09 GMT
I am confused about the answer to question #1 from: Training & Certification UPDATE, November 3, 2000. The duplicate IP address problem was "caused" by the administrator manually entering the duplicate IP address. In so doing, the symptom was 0.0.0.0 and there would have been a "Diplicate IP..." error box displayed on the PC which was not mentioned in the scenerio. I guess I don’t understand why I see this as a symptom but it is stated as the problem? Can you explain please? I struggle with technical questions/tests like these and maybe you can help me focus on what I need to in order to be successful! Thanks in advance..]]>mclaughc Mon, 06 Nov 2000 12:31:09 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dhcp2/certifiable-q-a-for-november-3-2000#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/certifiable-q-a-for-october-27-2000#commentsAnchorTue, 31 Oct 2000 18:16:29 GMT
I take exception to question 2. Specifically the question asks for the simplest solution. Solution A is proferred as the correct answer. I agree that the solution is relatively uncomplicated but I disagree that it is the simplest. Creating a HOSTS file is simple, copying it to local users workstations is also simple. I would estimate the entire set up could take 30-60 minutes depending on how complete you want to make the HOSTS file. But the goal here is simplicity. Setting up a DNS server could be considered simple. Updating DHCP scope is simple. However, the scenario describes an admin at a small branch office of a large corporation. Large corporations do not normally leave access to central servers to non-central admins. So given this scenario updating servers at a central corporate site that you do not have direct control of is complicated. Further the solution describes several configuration changes made to server services which add complexity to a relatively simple network configuration. Complexity is bad, it tends to cause problems and it is the opposite of simplicity. Both solutions would work, but response D is the best option for a simple solution.]]>Dan Philpott Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:16:29 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/dns/certifiable-q-a-for-october-27-2000#commentsAnchor