Jason-299789 (10/1/2012)
nice once dwain, never thought of that, though I suppose it depends on how much you can change the underlying database structure.
Actually I see this all the time. People create a field called status and then set it active/inactive. Without an "inactive" date, this is not a very extensible design because it means you can't mark the "thing" in the table as "to be deactivated on <some future date>."
My thought question: Have you ever been told that your query runs too fast?
My advice:
INDEXing a poor-performing query is like putting sugar on cat food. Yeah, it probably tastes better but are you sure you want to eat it?
The path of least resistance can be a slippery slope. Take care that fixing your fixes of fixes doesn't snowball and end up costing you more than fixing the root cause would have in the first place.
Need to UNPIVOT? Why not CROSS APPLY VALUES instead?[/url]
Since random numbers are too important to be left to chance, let's generate some![/url]
Learn to understand recursive CTEs by example.[/url]
[url url=http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/St