reid.kell (7/9/2013)
No. In my scenario, Luis' routine correctly generates 5000 records; yours generates one. In my text file, each "record" spans 35 lines. There are 35 lines x 5000 records = 175,000 lines in the text file. I need 5000 results, which Luis' routine produces. It's possible I didn't implement your solution correctly.
I asked that question because I thought I had run Luis's query against your sample data and then wrote my query to match its results set. Perhaps I'm mistaken.
If you've got something that works for your case, I say go with it!
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