Re: Collation
From: John Bell (jbellnewsposts_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 06/21/04
- Next message: John Bell: "Re: Best Approch??"
- Previous message: Martijn Tonies: "Re: ADO and a-sync cancelling of statement"
- In reply to: jb: "Collation"
- Next in thread: jb: "Re: Collation"
- Reply: jb: "Re: Collation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:40:06 +0100
Hi
You may want to send this request to sqlwish@microsoft.com. Using the
default collation may result in the application behaving differently
depending on the collation. Specifying a collation when accessing objects
external to your database should help. Another option would be to make sure
that they are installed in their own instance.
Rather than having to script the database you should think about storing the
database objects in a version control system. If you do this a mechanism
that parameterised the collation could be written.
John
"jb" <jb@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:935AD5FB-40B0-40B0-B01D-7C58EDE54EEB@microsoft.com...
> When you supply scripts to customers, where you believe their collation
default may be different from yours (e.g. UK <-> US), do you --- in order to
avoid collation conflicts --- go through (manually) and remove all the
"COLLATE" clauses that scripts from EM etc. seem to generate in their
database & column definitions? I am suprised that EM does not seem to have
an option to do this, as it seems to me forcing in collation clauses just
leads to problems?
- Next message: John Bell: "Re: Best Approch??"
- Previous message: Martijn Tonies: "Re: ADO and a-sync cancelling of statement"
- In reply to: jb: "Collation"
- Next in thread: jb: "Re: Collation"
- Reply: jb: "Re: Collation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|