A New Word: Fawtle

fawtle – n. a weird little flaw built into your partner that somehow only endears them more to you, in the way that impurities dissolved in water are what allow it to conduct electricity – if all the imperfections were removed, there would be no spark.

I won’t give you a specific, as it’s not really something I’d share, but my wife has a quirk that used to really annoy me. In some sense, it was a thing that I think I tried to avoid in myself.

However.

Over time, I realize this is a part of who she is. She knows it, the kids know it, I know it and not only accept it, but I can smile to myself a little and appreciate why the thing makes her unique and wonderful.

The more you find fawtle in others, the more you enjoy their differences from you and others.

From the Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows

Posted in Blog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Another Change

Today Redgate announced that we are partnering with Bregal Sagemount, a growth-focused private equity firm. There are no details of terms, and you can read the press release. It’s an opportunity for us to use this investment to drive growth forward in our products and solutions in the future.

I’ve been with Redgate since 2006, when they acquired SQL Server Central. At the time, a lot of people expressed concerns and worry about the acquisition. We announced it at the PASS Summit to a very mixed reaction from people who used the site. I tried to reassure people as best I could, noting that Redgate hadn’t expressed any plans to make major changes other than reduce external advertising.

They didn’t, and I’ve continued to run SQL Server Central for the last 18 years as a part of Redgate. While my job has changed in many ways, that has remained consistent, and I think we’ve delivered on helping the community learn, ask and answer questions, becoming better data professionals along the way.

The same types of assurances I gave are being given from various leaders at Redgate now, and I am taking them at face value. I know the founders of Redgate want to company to succeed and the fact that they didn’t sell outright is encouraging.

That being said, I’m nervous. I’ve been a part of restructurings, investments, sales, and more in the past, with mixed success. Whenever the foundations shift, I usually start looking for a new position. I’m not doing that today, but I am nervous because I don’t like big change.

I am hopeful this will mean that Redgate can tackle a few things that we’ve struggled to do and that we’ll invest in growing our company in ways that we struggled to do in the last decade. One of my hopes (selfishly)  is an investment in SQL Server Central, which has languished a bit the last few years. We made a platform change in 2019 (not my choice) and we’ve had some lingering issues since then. Most things work, but some don’t work well. Some are broken, and there are lingering issues that are either annoying or I’d like to change.

I also think this investment may help spur some changes in products and solutions that help customers solve more database issues. We are a for-profit company and revenue will certainly matter, but more investment in staff is always needed and wanted. If there’s one thing I’ve seen in the last 18 years is that there is always a backlog of things to work on, and I’m hopeful we’ll be able to not only tackle some of those things, but continue to deliver more value every week.

I’m optimistic about the future at Redgate, and nervous, all at the same time, but for now, I’m not looking to make a change.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Your AI Successes

Recently, I was discussing AI with a friend, and they asked me to name a great success of using AI to build software. I’ve tried a few things, and I’ve worked with customers who are using AI tech. However, most of the things I’ve seen built with AI are small tasks; they’re utilities or quick wins that change a minor part of the software. The items tend to be tactical and focused in a narrow band of fixes, and they might save a programmer time, but I’m not seeing large-scale team improvements in productivity.

Yet.

I think there is a chance for AI to dramatically change our industry, and perhaps help us tackle a lot of small things we haven’t wanted to, or been able to, find the time to build/fix/change/etc. Certainly, in the area of migrating from one version of a platform or framework to another, GenAI can be very useful. This can be a very tedious task, and one where humans can make lots of small mistakes. An AI agent likely can do this quicker, cheaper, and more accurately than humans. The question might be whether this is a huge success, as any single organization might do this rarely.

The biggest success in many organizations might be the ability of developers, or even business people, who can quickly build out an MVP of an idea to see if there is a project worth pursuing. These often won’t have the robust coding or security practices embedded, but they can perhaps shortcut putting more research into an idea until some value is proven. At least internally, if it doesn’t have good scalability or security, it shouldn’t be exposed publicly until it adds those capabilities.

When or where has an AI worked best for you? What impressed you about the AI technology interaction that changed how you might work in the future? Or perhaps if you’ve had a big failure and want to share, where did AI not work well?

I think most of my experience is that AI is still a bit of a toy and useful in small ways, but it hasn’t proven to me that it’s worth the hype we see in so much of the media. Maybe it will at some point, but so far this seems more of a dream than a reality for software professionals.

Steve Jones

Listen to the podcast at Libsyn, Spotify, or iTunes.

Note, podcasts are only available for a limited time online.

Posted in Editorial | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Using Prompt AI to Help Setup Data Analysis

I used Claude to build an application that loaded data for me. However, there were a few others things I needed done to help me get the data ready for analysis. I could have used Claude (or another human), but this was a place I’d need to do a lot of directing.

I did, however, use Prompt AI to help me get this moving quicker and start some analysis. This post covers the way I got assistance inside SSMS from Prompt AI.

This is part of a series of posts on SQL Prompt. You can see all my posts on SQL Prompt under that tag. This is part of a series of experiments with AI systems.

Adding New Structures

As a part of my data analysis, I needed to tag sessions with topics. This wasn’t really done as a part of most SQL Saturday events. While there might be tracks, often the sessions aren’t categorized with tags. It’s a pain, most organizers and most speakers don’t want to bother.

Plus, search works well on a website. For data analysis, not so much.

I decided to use Prompt AI to help a bit at this point, since I was low on credits.
I asked it to add a structure. Possibly I could have written the code in not much more time than it took for this prompt, but here I get to let an assistant take a stab and then critique the work. Here’s my prompt to SQL Prompt AI:

2025-12_0118

Here are the results. This has the PKs, FKs, and indexes, some of which I might have forgotten. I don’t love names like “description”, but that’s fine. I could easily fix that.

-- Create a table to store tags
CREATE TABLE dbo.Tags
(
    TagID INT IDENTITY(1, 1) PRIMARY KEY,
    TagName NVARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    Description NVARCHAR(500) NULL,
    CreatedDate DATETIME
        DEFAULT GETDATE()
);

-- Create a junction table to link sessions with tags (many-to-many relationship)
CREATE TABLE dbo.SessionTags
(
    SessionID INT NOT NULL,
    TagID INT NOT NULL,
    PRIMARY KEY (
                    SessionID,
                    TagID
                ),
    CONSTRAINT FK_SessionTags_Sessions
        FOREIGN KEY (SessionID)
        REFERENCES dbo.Sessions (SessionID),
    CONSTRAINT FK_SessionTags_Tags
        FOREIGN KEY (TagID)
        REFERENCES dbo.Tags (TagID)
);

-- Create index to improve query performance
CREATE INDEX IX_SessionTags_TagID ON dbo.SessionTags (TagID);
CREATE INDEX IX_SessionTags_SessionID ON dbo.SessionTags (SessionID);

Now, I need to analyze the data.

Fortunately, Prompt AI helped me. Below this DDL, was a snippet to test my tags. I had this code listed:

SELECT 
     s.SessionID, 
     s.Title, 
     STRING_AGG(t.TagName, ', ') AS Tags
FROM 
     dbo.Sessions s
LEFT JOIN 
     dbo.SessionTags st ON s.SessionID = st.SessionID
LEFT JOIN 
     dbo.Tags t ON st.TagID = t.TagID
--WHERE Title LIKE '%n rds%'
GROUP BY 
     s.SessionID, s.Title;

I used this to check my tags, which were non existent at this point, so I had all NULL values in the Tags column. Fortunately, I know how to write some code, so in another window I wrote this code, which inserts data, but doesn’t create dups since I might have dups based on my LIKE clause catching the same session twice.

I also get the list of current tags, so I could change the number used in the insert as needed. There are more elegant ways to do this, but I wanted to get something done.

INSERT dbo.SessionTags
(
     SessionID,
     TagID
)
SELECT SessionID, 10
FROM sessions WHERE Title LIKE '%n rds%'
   AND sessionid NOT IN (SELECT sessionid 
        FROM dbo.SessionTags 
     WHERE TagID = 10)

SELECT @@rowcount
GO
SELECT top 30
*
FROM dbo.Tags


There was a sample INSERT statement for tags as well, so I modified it to use tags I cared about. Then I started running my test query to look for NULL values and start filling them in.

Here’s a look at a run. I’ve added some tags, but there are some nulls. There are also multiple tags for some sessions. I added the description field as well, but for most of the data, this doesn’t exist, so I don’t have it. Yet. That’s another project.

2026-01_0130

Line 63 is for Snowflake, which isn’t a tag. So I edit my commented out code to include Snowflake and then execute it. This is commented, so as I hit execute it doesn’t run automatically.

2026-01_0131

Now I get a list of tags and use that to edit my numbers in the SessionTags insert statement. In this case, Snowflake is number 17, so I change the insert to that, and edit the LIKE statement. This will add that tag to all sessions with Snowflake in the title.

2026-01_0132

I repeated this for a number of sessions. Below, I’ve re-run my tag query and now we see Snowflake is added.

2026-01_0133

Why I Didn’t Use an AI for This

I built an application that loaded this data with Claude Code. I could have asked Claude to add the tags as well, but I didn’t have any data to put in there. I wasn’t even sure what I would do, especially as a lot of these sessions aren’t really sessions. Notice the timings above, the breaks, the panels, etc. There are also lunch breaks and other items that aren’t really sessions.

Claude could have cleaned this data. However, I want to be sure of what I’m removing. Having Claude write the delete (or run a select first) and then ask me what to do doesn’t seem to be a good use of its cost or my time.

I still need to be the human in the loop. There were some times I ran a select for certain words and then check the list before adding the tags. For example, here was what I did for Snowflake.

2026-01_0134

All those are good, but when I ran a search for Agent, I found mostly AI based results, but a few were SQL Agent sessions. Tagging those as AI wouldn’t make sense, so I had to find a better way to update the data I needed updating.

Summary

SQL Prompt didn’t do a lot here, but it did quickly get me moving on the task I was focused on rather than the details to support it. I could have written the DDL, but it would have taken focus away from me in thinking about tags. This did as good a job as I could do, or more importantly, as good a job as I needed.

It also gave me a query and insert statement to get moving, again, reducing my mental load. I could have written that query, but I would have spent a few minutes doing it rather than thinking about how to assign tags.

Ultimately I think this was a good use of AI, saving my time and energy, allowing me to focus on the task I was trying to accomplish without distraction.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment