May 4, 2015 at 9:31 am
Sean Lange (5/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (5/4/2015)
Jack Corbett (5/4/2015)
And for back to back posts to the thread. I really can't stand it when an OP says something like:Please help me fix this poorly performing query, but without any code changes.
So how am I supposed to help? Maybe with some indexing tips, but, in my opinion, that's a code change.
Sometimes, improving the indexing is the only option available. Supporting a product where most of the code is embedded in the code and requires approval to make changes, then needs to go through extensive testing and approval processes, you do what you can where you can.
Wow that person is way too snarky to the people who are trying to help him. It doesn't seem like any amount of indexing is going to help a flawed implementation. How can indexing fix the problem? It isn't a problem of data retrieval being too slow. It is a problem of pushing all the data over the network when only 1 row is needed. I also don't understand why changing a single query to execute a proc on another server requires "thousands" of stored proc changes. If that is true, which I highly doubt, then they need a complete system rewrite because everything is far too tightly coupled to be successful anyway.
You can smell the desperation coming out of that one. No need to pile on. They clearly made some poor choices early in their process and those choices are chewing on them now and they're trying to find a quick, free, way out from under. Still no excuse for treating the people trying to help in an unkind fashion.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
May 4, 2015 at 9:41 am
There's also no excuse for people breaking out their "I've got 20 years of experience" rings. which looks like might have been the start of it all. Doesn't matter though... let's stop beating on the OP so he doesn't have to get mad at those trying to help. Someone has to be the first to break the chain...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 4, 2015 at 9:45 am
And second. Right there with you.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
May 4, 2015 at 9:48 am
And a third that motion!
It looks like the thread got past that and is back in a productive direction.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
May 4, 2015 at 9:50 am
I have to agree as well. I have almost 20 years experience and I know that I don't know everything. I still have a lot more learn as I haven't used everything in SQL Server as you can only use that which your employer uses and is willing to use.
May 4, 2015 at 9:54 am
Grant Fritchey (5/4/2015)
Sean Lange (5/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (5/4/2015)
Jack Corbett (5/4/2015)
And for back to back posts to the thread. I really can't stand it when an OP says something like:Please help me fix this poorly performing query, but without any code changes.
So how am I supposed to help? Maybe with some indexing tips, but, in my opinion, that's a code change.
Sometimes, improving the indexing is the only option available. Supporting a product where most of the code is embedded in the code and requires approval to make changes, then needs to go through extensive testing and approval processes, you do what you can where you can.
Wow that person is way too snarky to the people who are trying to help him. It doesn't seem like any amount of indexing is going to help a flawed implementation. How can indexing fix the problem? It isn't a problem of data retrieval being too slow. It is a problem of pushing all the data over the network when only 1 row is needed. I also don't understand why changing a single query to execute a proc on another server requires "thousands" of stored proc changes. If that is true, which I highly doubt, then they need a complete system rewrite because everything is far too tightly coupled to be successful anyway.
You can smell the desperation coming out of that one. No need to pile on. They clearly made some poor choices early in their process and those choices are chewing on them now and they're trying to find a quick, free, way out from under. Still no excuse for treating the people trying to help in an unkind fashion.
No kidding. Not wanting to pile on is exactly why I mentioned it here and not there. 😉
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
May 4, 2015 at 10:11 am
Lynn Pettis (5/4/2015)
I have to agree as well. I have almost 20 years experience and I know that I don't know everything. I still have a lot more learn as I haven't used everything in SQL Server as you can only use that which your employer uses and is willing to use.
So true Lynn.
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
May 4, 2015 at 11:54 am
Jeff Moden (5/4/2015)
There's also no excuse for people breaking out their "I've got 20 years of experience" rings. which looks like might have been the start of it all. Doesn't matter though... let's stop beating on the OP so he doesn't have to get mad at those trying to help. Someone has to be the first to break the chain...
I agree and the piling on is one reason I didn't post a link.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
May 4, 2015 at 11:55 am
Lynn Pettis (5/4/2015)
Jack Corbett (5/4/2015)
And for back to back posts to the thread. I really can't stand it when an OP says something like:Please help me fix this poorly performing query, but without any code changes.
So how am I supposed to help? Maybe with some indexing tips, but, in my opinion, that's a code change.
Sometimes, improving the indexing is the only option available. Supporting a product where most of the code is embedded in the code and requires approval to make changes, then needs to go through extensive testing and approval processes, you do what you can where you can.
I agree and I've been there too, but I still consider that a code change. It may not completely break the system like changing T-SQL, but it can cause problems.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
May 4, 2015 at 12:43 pm
Jack Corbett (5/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (5/4/2015)
Jack Corbett (5/4/2015)
And for back to back posts to the thread. I really can't stand it when an OP says something like:Please help me fix this poorly performing query, but without any code changes.
So how am I supposed to help? Maybe with some indexing tips, but, in my opinion, that's a code change.
Sometimes, improving the indexing is the only option available. Supporting a product where most of the code is embedded in the code and requires approval to make changes, then needs to go through extensive testing and approval processes, you do what you can where you can.
I agree and I've been there too, but I still consider that a code change. It may not completely break the system like changing T-SQL, but it can cause problems.
At least in my situation it wasn't considered a code change so didn't have to get higher approval and go through formal testing and acceptance processes.
May 5, 2015 at 10:50 am
Bloody heck I hate dealing with DISA STIGs!
I'm also surprised that (in my quick Googleing) there aren't more discussions / blog post / articles around the web on applying and interprepting them. And frankly, that's what it comes down to, the intrerpretation of the wording of the STIG.
Some are fairly straight-forward to understand (no login should have the "CONNECT SQL" privilege directly granted," or "no privileges with GRANT WITH GRANT") others, well, not so clear.
Making it worse, of course, is you have multiple, competing interpretations:
1. The DBA trying to apply the STIG
2. The security teams interpretation
3. DISAs interpretation
Quite often with #2 and #3 being done by non-technical people.
Anyone want to see if we can get Steve to spin up a sub-forum just for discussing SQL STIGs?
😉
May 5, 2015 at 11:00 am
jasona.work (5/5/2015)
Bloody heck I hate dealing with DISA STIGs!I'm also surprised that (in my quick Googleing) there aren't more discussions / blog post / articles around the web on applying and interprepting them. And frankly, that's what it comes down to, the intrerpretation of the wording of the STIG.
Some are fairly straight-forward to understand (no login should have the "CONNECT SQL" privilege directly granted," or "no privileges with GRANT WITH GRANT") others, well, not so clear.
Making it worse, of course, is you have multiple, competing interpretations:
1. The DBA trying to apply the STIG
2. The security teams interpretation
3. DISAs interpretation
Quite often with #2 and #3 being done by non-technical people.
Anyone want to see if we can get Steve to spin up a sub-forum just for discussing SQL STIGs?
😉
And unfortunately the interpretation by #1 is overruled by the interpretation made by #2 and #3. Leave it to #2 and #3 to fight it out amongst themselves.
May 5, 2015 at 4:41 pm
Lynn Pettis (5/5/2015)
jasona.work (5/5/2015)
Bloody heck I hate dealing with DISA STIGs!I'm also surprised that (in my quick Googleing) there aren't more discussions / blog post / articles around the web on applying and interpreting them. And frankly, that's what it comes down to, the interpretation of the wording of the STIG.
Some are fairly straight-forward to understand (no login should have the "CONNECT SQL" privilege directly granted," or "no privileges with GRANT WITH GRANT") others, well, not so clear.
Making it worse, of course, is you have multiple, competing interpretations:
1. The DBA trying to apply the STIG
2. The security teams interpretation
3. DISAs interpretation
Quite often with #2 and #3 being done by non-technical people.
Anyone want to see if we can get Steve to spin up a sub-forum just for discussing SQL STIGs?
😉
And unfortunately the interpretation by #1 is overruled by the interpretation made by #2 and #3. Leave it to #2 and #3 to fight it out amongst themselves.
Oh heck yeah!
I'll make my case as to why I think something isn't a finding, but it ain't worth the pain and agony to argue when an auditor says "it's a finding, fix it."
OTOH, we did recently pass an audit, so I guess I'm doing something right...
:hehe:
May 5, 2015 at 5:44 pm
jasona.work (5/5/2015)
Lynn Pettis (5/5/2015)
jasona.work (5/5/2015)
Bloody heck I hate dealing with DISA STIGs!I'm also surprised that (in my quick Googleing) there aren't more discussions / blog post / articles around the web on applying and interpreting them. And frankly, that's what it comes down to, the interpretation of the wording of the STIG.
Some are fairly straight-forward to understand (no login should have the "CONNECT SQL" privilege directly granted," or "no privileges with GRANT WITH GRANT") others, well, not so clear.
Making it worse, of course, is you have multiple, competing interpretations:
1. The DBA trying to apply the STIG
2. The security teams interpretation
3. DISAs interpretation
Quite often with #2 and #3 being done by non-technical people.
Anyone want to see if we can get Steve to spin up a sub-forum just for discussing SQL STIGs?
😉
And unfortunately the interpretation by #1 is overruled by the interpretation made by #2 and #3. Leave it to #2 and #3 to fight it out amongst themselves.
Oh heck yeah!
I'll make my case as to why I think something isn't a finding, but it ain't worth the pain and agony to argue when an auditor says "it's a finding, fix it."
OTOH, we did recently pass an audit, so I guess I'm doing something right...
:hehe:
Hey, passing an audit is saying something. Congratulations.
May 5, 2015 at 8:13 pm
jasona.work (5/5/2015)
Anyone want to see if we can get Steve to spin up a sub-forum just for discussing SQL STIGs?
😉
Isn't this the forum?
Viewing 15 posts - 48,346 through 48,360 (of 66,549 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply