Viewing 15 posts - 1,006 through 1,020 (of 4,080 total)
.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 7:27 pm
It should only have a single column called [Column 0]. Correct? Or did you give the column a name?
Assuming it's called [Column 0], see if...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 5:29 pm
By the way, the solution I posted is going to take away the optimizers' opportunity to take advantage of any appropriately-sequenced covering indexes. In other words,...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 3:11 pm
tshad (7/13/2011)
The problem is...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 2:53 pm
SQLRNNR (7/13/2011)
Gianluca Sartori (7/13/2011)
Here he goes again.I didn't notice it from the start.
Funny. 🙂
Added my two bits. :-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D
Ah... that explains it... not enough bits to make a complete byte...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 1:35 pm
[font="Wingdings"]LOL LOL LOL[/font]:hehe:
[font="Wingdings"]I like that!! The little "frownies" are quaintly misleading.[/font]
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 1:26 pm
carl.meads (7/13/2011)
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 7:50 am
Last I heard, adding produces a sum and subtracting produces a difference (or variance).
I don't know what else to tell 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
July 13, 2011 at 7:28 am
It is easy, unless there is something you are not telling us.
Do us the courtesy of posting the schema or code for the things you've tried.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 13, 2011 at 7:06 am
If I understand you correctly, you want accompanying detail (refID) to go with the maximum value. Basically you want information for the top row (sorted by value) 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
July 12, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Understood. But please understand the code posted will ONLY work as long as there are NO changes to those ExamRowID numbers. If those ExamRowID numbers...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 12, 2011 at 5:58 pm
Your problem is that there is NOTHING in your data that identifies the READING rows as compared to the WRITING rows, other than the examrowID. Assuming...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 12, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Forget Denali and R2... It's almost time to start talking about (American) Football again.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 12, 2011 at 2:25 pm
It were only a single table, you could try an index over the three columns you are doing your GROUP BY on. In your pseudocode example, that would...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 12, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Declare @Results Table (ProductName varchar(50) primary key, TotalPaidAmount decimal(22,2), TransactionCount int, Customers int)
INSERT INTO @Results
SELECT ProductName, SUM(paid_amount) AS TotalPaidAmount, count(*) as TransactionCount, distinct(customer_ID) as Customers
FROM transactions tr1
WHERE date_of_sale >= '2010-01-01'...
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
July 12, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 1,006 through 1,020 (of 4,080 total)