Lokasi ngalangkungan proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Ngawartoskeun bug]   [Panyetelan cookie]                
Skip to content

Update add-sensitivity-classification-transact-sql.md#9661

Closed
MaxMeng1985 wants to merge 1 commit intoMicrosoftDocs:livefrom
MaxMeng1985:patch-2
Closed

Update add-sensitivity-classification-transact-sql.md#9661
MaxMeng1985 wants to merge 1 commit intoMicrosoftDocs:livefrom
MaxMeng1985:patch-2

Conversation

@MaxMeng1985
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

"SQL Server does not maintain a list of the mapping between LABEL and LABEL_ID.
Also, it seems most of the parameter of this T-SQL command are optional, e.g., when we create a classification using this T-SQL command, we can provide both LABEL and LABEL_ID. Or we can provide only one of them. Also, we can set LABEL A with LABEL_ID 1 for object A, but also set LABEL A with LABEL_ID 2 for object B.
if you want to ensure a one-to-one relationship between the LABEL and LABEL_ID, you need to specify both the LABEL and LABEL_ID correctly when you create a classification. "
My change is to trying to clarify the above.

"SQL Server does not maintain a list of the mapping between LABEL and LABEL_ID.
Also, it seems most of the parameter of this T-SQL command are optional, e.g., when we create a classification using this T-SQL command, we can provide both LABEL and LABEL_ID. Or we can provide only one of them.   Also, we can set LABEL A with LABEL_ID 1 for object A, but also set LABEL A with LABEL_ID 2 for object B. 
if you want to ensure a one-to-one relationship between the LABEL and LABEL_ID, you need to specify both the LABEL and LABEL_ID correctly when you create a classification. "
My change is to trying to clarify the above.
@prmerger-automator
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MaxMeng1985 : Thanks for your contribution! The author(s) have been notified to review your proposed change.

@learn-build-service-prod
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Learn Build status updates of commit 87b4d93:

✅ Validation status: passed

File Status Preview URL Details
docs/t-sql/statements/add-sensitivity-classification-transact-sql.md ✅Succeeded

For more details, please refer to the build report.

For any questions, please:

@Court72
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Court72 commented Feb 9, 2024

@Madhumitatripathy

Can you review the proposed changes?

When the changes are ready for publication, add a #sign-off comment to signal that the PR is ready for the review team to merge.

#label:"aq-pr-triaged"
@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@prmerger-automator prmerger-automator Bot added the aq-pr-triaged tracking label for the PR review team label Feb 9, 2024
@Madhumitatripathy
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks @MaxMeng1985. At present the ADD CLASSIFICATION command works if any one of the parameters are supplied. If user supplies only LABEL or only INFORMATION_TYPE without corresponding IDs, the command will succeed. However, it is recommended to have one to one mapping between LABEL_ID and LABEL name. Additionally RANK parameter is not used anywhere in SQL today, so just having a rank value against a column without a LABEL or INFORMATION_TYPE will not add any value and should be avoided. TSQL will succeed if only RANK parameter is provided which has been identified as a bug and this will be addressed in future.

@MaxMeng1985
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Thanks @MaxMeng1985. At present the ADD CLASSIFICATION command works if any one of the parameters are supplied. If user supplies only LABEL or only INFORMATION_TYPE without corresponding IDs, the command will succeed. However, it is recommended to have one to one mapping between LABEL_ID and LABEL name. Additionally RANK parameter is not used anywhere in SQL today, so just having a rank value against a column without a LABEL or INFORMATION_TYPE will not add any value and should be avoided. TSQL will succeed if only RANK parameter is provided which has been identified as a bug and this will be addressed in future.

@Madhumitatripathy, thanks for your comments and confirmation. That is the reason I proposed the changes. Could you please help to review it? Thanks.

@rwestMSFT
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MaxMeng1985 We're going to do an internal PR which takes these suggestions into account, but we will not be approving this PR directly.

When the internal PR is merged, this PR will automatically close, and then the updated article will be published in the next business day.

@MaxMeng1985
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@MaxMeng1985 We're going to do an internal PR which takes these suggestions into account, but we will not be approving this PR directly.

When the internal PR is merged, this PR will automatically close, and then the updated article will be published in the next business day.

@rwestMSFT , thanks for the update, that works for me.

@v-ccolin v-ccolin closed this Feb 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants