The load order is far less interesting than the actual database names... "BlackArts01" & "NastyFast01..."
It's kinda like using the Kama Sutra to demonstrate how the Dewey Decimal System works, to a 15 year old...
You'd like the BlackArts01 and NastyFast01 databases. They contain the guts of databases used in presentations to demonstrate some really fast code. One of them, for example, demonstrates a 5 aggregate system across 7 million row (1040 bytes per row) of a 7GB table and uses one of the aggregates as a divisor for the others to produce 4 different temporal percentage aggregates by month for 7 years with 4 other columns ranking by month, month of year, year, and grand total... in about 4 seconds. Part of the ancillary learning in that presentation is how to truly use minimal logging to create the table with the clustered index already in place and it clearly demonstrates why you shouldn't necessarily delete "duplicate" indexes. It also demonstrates the fallacy of relying on a Clustered Index for performance especially on wide tables.
BlackArts01 was the precon that Ed Wagner and I did for Pittsburgh back in 2016 and featured parts of NastyFast01. It's also where I pointed out the extreme importance of the number "318" to every DBA in the world. 😉
I'll admit to being intrigued...
Are you going to spill the beans on "318" or is it become the new "42"?
Golden ratio of 7.5714285714285714285714285714286😉
😎
Of course! How could I have been so blind? 😎
Nothing so sophisticated as that. Quite literally, you're looking at the number the wrong way. It's not actually a number... it's a glyph.
Also, the actual golden ratio so far as DBAs are concerned is "3/1"... If you get up to 3 WTFs during a code review, the golden rule is that you're code won't make it past the DBA. 😉
Nothing so sophisticated as that. Quite literally, you're looking at the number the wrong way. It's not actually a number... it's a glyph.
Sooo... Like typing 55378008 into a calculator and turning it upside down...
Also, the actual golden ratio so far as DBAs are concerned is "3/1"... If you get up to 3 WTFs during a code review, the golden rule is that you're code won't make it past the DBA. 😉
Ha! If I pulled the emergency brake at the 1st 3 WTFs, I'd bring development to a screeching halt. I've had to revert to the "just don't make it any worse than it already is" rule... Or the, "not all of this belongs in a single, explicit, transaction... Do you know what transactions actually are or what they actually do?" rule...
I just glad no one has the initiative to learn about query hints...