Ouch. I agree with Grant, it sounds like all you can do at this point is document and try to work with them. I hope that turns out...

Jason Crider (4/7/2009)

---

They have never had the load that we are giving them and the application (mainly the database) is having trouble keeping up. There are tons of views(that have...

The cost is the same. Now, if you return fewer columns, the cost would probably be different.

If that query is for the same table, is that table fairly static?...

I want to preface my response by saying I don't know the specifics of your application or tables, but these are general "best practices" in my experience:

1. Use stored...

Nice one, TJ! I was cringing through most of it, glad it was just an April Fool's Day article! 🙂

Here's a link to my version. There's a Standard and an Enterprise version, but these will only run on SQL 2005 or 2008:

http://sqlfool.com/2008/11/updated-index-defrag-script-2005-2008/%5B/url%5D

That's great, I'm glad I could help! Just be careful when using correlated subqueries on large data sets, it can sometimes have a pretty big (negative) performance impact. ...

Ah, I misread your initial question, sorry about that!

Try this:

Create Table #myTable

(

Location_Code int

, System_Date datetime

...

Hi Shawn,

I'm not sure how your data is actually stored (i.e. table structures), but you can handle this a couple of ways. One is just to add another CASE...

How are your system's perfmon counters looking? Are you running high CPU? Do you have a very low idle time?

Adding a NOLOCK hint on the SELECT...

Without knowing more about your environment, that's my general suggestion, yes. 🙂

To give you an idea, I have some tables that do pretty much the same tasks as your...

I agree with GSquared, that sort of load should be pretty easily handled by SQL Server. What are you clustering on? For tables where write speed is important,...

Excellent! I'm glad you've got it working. And thank you for posting your solution, it's always incredibly helpful for future readers. 🙂

Ah, I understand. Unfortunately, I don't have the answer. 🙁

Perhaps this article would help?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb677368(SQL.90).aspx

No, the UNIQUE constraint will only allow for 1 of any value, including NULL. Whether the column is uniqueidentifier or varchar doesn't matter, except you'll probably eat up more...