|
|
|
Hahah - your comment made me think of Being John Malkovich - in the restaurant after John has entered the portal into himself. I swear I understood that scene perfectly once or twice. 
Malkovich? Malkovich.
Malkovich Malkovich. Malkovich. :ouch:!
|
|
|
|
|
To the pit of misery! Dilly Dilly!
|
|
|
|
|
Dilly Dilly! ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course it is. I am staying out of this fight in case the bullets start flying! 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I now see his post below this one, that's him indeed !
But his last post is relatively mild, normally guns and bullets are mentioned and he uses more explicit language, well guess he's getting older and milder ... 
|
|
|
|
|
Ooooooooooooh... I can feel the burn. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
'm astounded at the amount of people who didn't get this.
|
|
|
|
|
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer.
|
|
|
|
|
Our department has our own physical database server, on which only our department has access.
Our department supervisor tried to run a Qlikview app that uses stored procedures, which may or may not use functions as well.
Only me and two other people have execute permissions on OUR server, and the department supervisor is not one of them.
So, I send an email to the DBA(sshole) downstairs and request that our AD group (which only includes the people in our office) be given execute permission on every database and stored proc/function.
His response: "Are you sure you want to do that?"
After another half-dozen exchanges:
Him: "Can you give me specifics? Which database stored proc/function are they trying to execute?"
Me: "Really? You want to do this one-at-a-f*ckin-time? Fine - I can play that." and I gave the db/func name, ending with "This is f*ckin absurd."
I'm sure I'm gonna get a call from HR, but these idiots are standing in the way of us doing our jobs.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulations, you have received the Wally Reflector.
|
|
|
|
|
And HR will say, "He said you're sick, you're obscene."
|
|
|
|
|
u have ur own servers that u cant control...a pity [^]
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I am that guy, except I don't care about ddl, read write, execute whatever. As long as you don't screw with anyone else's database. Or the server it self (with 1700 databases enterprise wide micro managing everyone would be impossible)
Edit, depending on the data that is contained in the database and what Audit has to say about it of coarse...
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
modified 10-Jan-18 14:42pm.
|
|
|
|
|
trust issues...
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
It Could Be The Technology
This took me back a few years to me when we were insuring my app would only ahve ability to run SQL via Stored Procs. I was setting them individually and quickly getting tired of it.
There are other roles but db_executor is not really defined automatically and I was puzzled so I found this:
db_executor role - SQLServerCentral[^]
I had to explain the role to a DBA also. Could it be your DBA is uninformed? Very possible.
Just thought this was interesting.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
You don't want to be on HR's sh*t list. Once you are on that kind of list, it is difficult to get off of it.
Can you speak about this dba(sshole) to your boss?
|
|
|
|
|
HR doesn't want to be on JSOP sh**tlist. The hard copies of that list are called "graveyards".
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly, there is only one Chuck Norris, and John is not him. 
|
|
|
|
|
Chuck Norris administers His Justice in the Heavens. On Earth the burden falls to his human counterpart, JSOP.
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember when Peter Norton was a legend among legends, and Norton Utilities were a must-have in your toolkit.
I'm just setting up a new desktop (an Acer) and am cleaning out the bloatware that seems to have metastasised throughout the machine. I'm up to Norton anti-virus and on the uninstall screen is a checkbox (pre-checked) at the end of the "Are you sure you want to uninstall" dialog that looks exactly like a "I agree to the terms of use" checkbox.
Except it isn't.
It says "Get layered protection by allowing Norton Security Scan to be activated and periodically scan your computer for viruses, spyware malware and other threats".
So on the "I want to uninstall Norton Security" dialog is a pre-checked dim grey checkbox specifically asking you to allow them to install a Norton security product.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
