Do I trust what my SMS agents are telling me?

This XML update that was originally released Oct 10th and then updated Oct
19th has got me .
I have roughly 600 SMS clients, 150 of which would be XP machines and 450
Windows 2000.
Right now I have a little over 400 SMS clients (a mix of XP and 2000)
requesting 924191 which SMS describes as a Security update for Windows (but
updates the XML parser and Core Services), and another 532 clients
requesting 925672, described as MSXML4.0 SP2 Security update.
Obviously, I've got a lot of clients requesting both (or requesting the same
update under two different names'). Is this simply because they have
multiple versions of these XML components on their machines, all of which
need updating? These updates aren't going to stomp on each other? Should I
be deploying both?
Advice for an SMS admin (not an XML guy) appreciated.
SMS 2003 SP1 on W2K3 SP1> Obviously, I've got a lot of clients requesting both (or requesting the
> same update under two different names').
The update released for MSXML3 was seperate from the update released for
MSXML4, even though the issue that each of these updates fixed was the same.

> Is this simply because they have multiple versions of these XML components
> on their machines, all of which need updating?
Yes

>These updates aren't going to stomp on each other? Should I be deploying
>both?
No they are not going to stomp on each other, yes, deploy both.
"Phil McNeill" <philmcneill@.NOSPAM4MEhydroottawa.com> wrote in message
news:uhwgP$G%23GHA.1224@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> This XML update that was originally released Oct 10th and then updated Oct
> 19th has got me .
> I have roughly 600 SMS clients, 150 of which would be XP machines and 450
> Windows 2000.
> Right now I have a little over 400 SMS clients (a mix of XP and 2000)
> requesting 924191 which SMS describes as a Security update for Windows
> (but updates the XML parser and Core Services), and another 532 clients
> requesting 925672, described as MSXML4.0 SP2 Security update.
> Obviously, I've got a lot of clients requesting both (or requesting the
> same update under two different names'). Is this simply because they
> have multiple versions of these XML components on their machines, all of
> which need updating? These updates aren't going to stomp on each other?
> Should I be deploying both?
> Advice for an SMS admin (not an XML guy) appreciated.
> SMS 2003 SP1 on W2K3 SP1
>
>|||Thanks for the reply Alex. I was fairly sure that was the case, but already
deployed to my test group prior to the Oct 19th update that added updates
for Windows 2000. I'll deploy the additional updates to that group and see
how it goes.
Thanks again,
Phil
"Alex Krawarik[MSFT]" <alexkr@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eC2DC0I%23GHA.3456@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The update released for MSXML3 was seperate from the update released for
> MSXML4, even though the issue that each of these updates fixed was the
> same.
>
> Yes
>
> No they are not going to stomp on each other, yes, deploy both.
>

divide by zero error

Hello,
When I originally wrote the SQL below, I didn't think the last two fields
could ever be zero, but I was wrong. How can I rewrite this so if
NUM_PRODUCTION or NUM_PIECE_SIZE are zero, TotWithFuel simply equals zero?
SELECT
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
* dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
/ dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE AS TotWithFuel
Thanks in advance!
AmberTry:
SELECT
isnull(
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
* dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
/
nullif(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION, 0) /
nullif(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE, 0)
, 0) AS TotWithFuel
AMB
"amber" wrote:

> Hello,
> When I originally wrote the SQL below, I didn't think the last two fields
> could ever be zero, but I was wrong. How can I rewrite this so if
> NUM_PRODUCTION or NUM_PIECE_SIZE are zero, TotWithFuel simply equals zero?
> SELECT
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
> * dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
> / dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE AS TotWithFuel
> Thanks in advance!
> Amber|||"amber" <amber@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:50239A89-6D09-4DE2-805F-3A6E55FBEA4B@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> When I originally wrote the SQL below, I didn't think the last two fields
> could ever be zero, but I was wrong. How can I rewrite this so if
> NUM_PRODUCTION or NUM_PIECE_SIZE are zero, TotWithFuel simply equals zero?
> SELECT
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
> * dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
> / dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE AS TotWithFuel
> Thanks in advance!
> Amber
SELECT
CASE WHEN dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL = 0 OR
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE = 0 THEN 0 ELSE
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
* dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
/ dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE END AS TotWithFuel|||SELECT case when dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION = 0 or
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE
= 0 then 0
else (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
(dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
* dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
/
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE
end AS TotWithFuel
I would also consider using an alias on your tables to make it easier to
work with, at least to get rid of the dbo. in the column aliases. That
looks hard to read :)
just add AS <alias> like:
from dbo.tablename as tablename or something like this, but even shorter.
Don't lose the meaning of the name in the shortend version, thought. What
you have is better than using the kind of aliases some folks use: (A.? B.?
C.?) When you have like 10-15 tables in the query who knows what is going
on.
--
----
Louis Davidson - http://spaces.msn.com/members/drsql/
SQL Server MVP
"Arguments are to be avoided: they are always vulgar and often convincing."
(Oscar Wilde)
"amber" <amber@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:50239A89-6D09-4DE2-805F-3A6E55FBEA4B@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> When I originally wrote the SQL below, I didn't think the last two fields
> could ever be zero, but I was wrong. How can I rewrite this so if
> NUM_PRODUCTION or NUM_PIECE_SIZE are zero, TotWithFuel simply equals zero?
> SELECT
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_RATE +
> (dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_FUEL_RATE -
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_RATE.NUM_BASE_FUEL_RATE)
> * dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_FUEL)
> / dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PRODUCTION /
> dbo.TDT_CUT_BLOCK_LGN_FALLING.NUM_PIECE_SIZE AS TotWithFuel
> Thanks in advance!
> Amber