Re: SQL Problem

From: Niall Litchfield <Niall.Litchfield_at_btinternet.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 10:54:12 +0100
Message-ID: <9pmju8$cic$1@plutonium.btinternet.com>

"Ed Prochak" <edprochak_at_magicinterface.com> wrote in message news:3BBE9E86.2EF5EDBB_at_magicinterface.com...
>
> Sometimes you just have to make a choice and live with it. If you can
> get a manager to say which way to default the situation, then hopefully
> this will get most of the records back in line. Is it possible that the
> side effects are minimal by choosing one part of the overlap over
> another? (e.g. if seniority is company wide, then which store was
> employee located in has no impact. But if it's store-based for some
> benefits, then there are consequences to resolve.)
>
> Not everyone has the luxury of sending the data back to get cleaned up.
> Lucky you!
>

Indeed. Part of the argument for sending it back was that the reason these overlaps exist was that there was a known bug with the application (3rd party) and equally a known workaround which ensured that this would not happen. As you might imagine this sort of data also causes somewhat innacurate management information. The whole issue is resolved for the moment, and I have several scripts now which identify the problem records. (169 out of 4 million).

Niall Received on Sat Oct 06 2001 - 04:54:12 CDT