Viewing 15 posts - 5,371 through 5,385 (of 6,486 total)
In my neck of the woods they're known for creating large campuses with perks that "go into the compensation package": on-site doctor/dentist/dietitian, free cafeterias, entertainment centers/gyms, etc... all on the...
January 6, 2008 at 8:54 pm
If it's to speed up a WHERE clause, then order of the columns in the index should be from most slective to least selective. The optimizer should be smart...
January 4, 2008 at 3:02 pm
That's awesome...Good for you! It just took them a while to figure out what we all knew for some time...
January 4, 2008 at 2:54 pm
on the other hand - if you're actually talking about a datetime field (i.e. a "date" field, not a timestamp field), then simply using something like
...dateadd(ms,3,mydatefield)...
will add 3 ms to...
January 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm
with SQLBill's objection that timestamps have nothing to do with date or time anything in mind - SQL 2005 has a built-in function to return sequential timestamps in the default...
January 4, 2008 at 2:34 pm
that usually means you don't have enough slots in from of the decimal point to cover everything. Try casting to decimal(10,3)
January 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm
L_voren (1/4/2008)
I'm sorry I must have misunderstood something here. If there are a max of 2 rows per group why would the delete need to be run more than once?
If...
January 4, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Considering you're throwing all of the fields in - the performance will likely suck pretty badly on this one.
L_voren's solution will get rid of one dupe per group, so you'd...
January 4, 2008 at 9:13 am
there's a system stored procedure that does that, call sp_rename
As I recall - syntax is
sp_rename @objname='oldname' @newname='newname'
January 4, 2008 at 8:52 am
There are also several occasions where data types are slightly different and would cause things to fail. date fields in particular.
If the migration assistant Perry pointed out doesn't help...
January 4, 2008 at 8:50 am
GilaMonster (1/4/2008)
Koji Matsumura (1/4/2008)[hr
Thank you Gail for the info.
I guess I was somehow confused with char VS varchar datatype.
Yeah. The varxxx datatypes have 2 bytes extra to store the data...
January 4, 2008 at 8:27 am
While you might be able to get it to work, I'm fairly confident that will NOT be supported...ever. MS tends to whine if your hardware isn't EXACTLY the same...
January 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Don't convert your dates to string - convert your strings to dates. As of right now you're comparing string values (where '02/01/2007' >'01/28/2008').
you want:
SELECT * FROM [MyDateTable]
WHERE StartDate
BETWEEN cast('02/01/2007'...
January 3, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Considering that a clustered index will dictate the physical order in which data is stored in the table, creating a clustered index will likely take a while with 10 Million...
January 3, 2008 at 9:59 pm
You're right, but it's a database with plenty of space and lots of trans log space in simple recovery mode (as in 5GB free in the data are and 4GB...
January 3, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 5,371 through 5,385 (of 6,486 total)