Viewing 15 posts - 286 through 300 (of 4,080 total)
He's having a rules engine generate his SQL queries. He liked the functionality of IN, but it won't work for multiple columns at once. I...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 2, 2016 at 2:12 pm
In any event, for multiple-column testing, you're probably going to have to write some inline table-valued functions like this one. Go ahead and get the multiple ORs...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 2, 2016 at 11:07 am
IN only works for equalities. But what did you want to be BETWEEN 1 and 5? Columns 1-5, or something else?
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 2, 2016 at 10:36 am
What should the result be if a row matches two or more established groups? For example, there is a 'Smith' group and a 'Jones' group; then, you...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 2, 2016 at 6:22 am
The optimizer sometimes chooses a "good enough" solution rather than take the time to explore all possible query plans.
The clustered index is sequenced on Column [a]. This means...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 1, 2016 at 8:38 pm
Actually, I was referring to why the definition of "expensive" changed, not the OPs current speed.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 1, 2016 at 8:47 am
Gail, does it have to do with things like parallel processing? Much higher CPU cost to get faster throughput?
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
September 1, 2016 at 7:43 am
Evidently it's possible. I see some articles out there on point.
Google all of these at once: MSDN TSQL EXCEL EXPORT MULTIPLE TABS
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 12:06 pm
After looking at the output from RAND(), you may want to read this article:
http://blogs.lessthandot.com/index.php/DataMgmt/DataDesign/sql-server-set-based-random-numbers/%5B/url%5D
RAND() values repeat when doing set-based operations, so many of us use the following formula to generate...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 7:26 am
No, I'm not talking about the input batches. I mean how many names are in your client table, or whatever.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 7:19 am
Good point to remember is that without a final ORDER BY clause, the optimizer may present rows to you in a manner you didn't anticipate. It just goes...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 7:14 am
Mis-posted. Withdrawn.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 7:02 am
If the manual process works for you, then go with it. But thanks for bringing up an interesting problem. 🙂
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 7:00 am
Ron, how many correct names are we talking about? I'm assuming this is like a customer name or something. Is the amount of correct names in...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 6:58 am
+1 Eirikur
I wouldn't have thought that would have worked. From somewhere I had the idea that time datatypes always "assumed" day 0. (Our systems always...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
August 31, 2016 at 6:56 am
Viewing 15 posts - 286 through 300 (of 4,080 total)