mark 4643 (11/7/2013)
dwain.c (11/6/2013)
There may very well be an easier way to do this, but this is what I came up with:Thanks!
I had played around with a derived table and a cross join, but cross apply is probably better. It's something I rarely use
I also tried a CROSS JOIN but thought the CROSS APPLY may help to limit the row set more efficiently. CA has a tendency to parallelize many queries, improving their elapsed time (often) pretty significantly.
I'd like another shot at this one. I wasn't particularly happy with the solution I gave you. But more test data would be helpful. I'll try to come back to it when I have a bit of time on my hands.
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