DP-500 · Question #80
Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question sets might…
The correct answer is B. No. The correct answer 'No' indicates that the proposed, but truncated, solution failed to sufficiently address potential query issues for UTF-8 encoded strings using automatic schema inference and default collation.
Question
Options
- AYes
- BNo
How the community answered
(39 responses)- A28% (11)
- B72% (28)
Why each option
The correct answer 'No' indicates that the proposed, but truncated, solution failed to sufficiently address potential query issues for UTF-8 encoded strings using automatic schema inference and default collation.
Without the full solution, it is inferred that the proposed change did not adequately resolve issues like incorrect data type mapping (e.g., VARCHAR instead of NVARCHAR), string truncation, or improper sorting/comparison that can arise when relying solely on automatic schema inference and default collation for diverse UTF-8 data. Explicitly defining the schema with appropriate NVARCHAR types and a suitable collation in the OPENROWSET WITH clause is often essential for correctness and optimal performance in such scenarios.
Concept tested: Serverless SQL pool data type inference and collation for UTF-8 data
Source: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/synapse-analytics/sql/query-parquet-files#query-specific-columns
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.