Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 5,026 through 5,040 (of 5,841 total)

  • RE: SQL 2000 db, queries running slow in SQL 2005

    jvamvas (8/19/2008)


    Stage I

    DBCC UPDATEUSAGE

    UPDATE STATISTICS (with FULL scan) for all tables

    exec sp_recompile for all objects

    ...

  • RE: SQL 2000 db, queries running slow in SQL 2005

    I think Jeffery has the prime suggestion.

    If that doesn't address the issue, take a look at the query plans of the affected queries and see if they can...

  • RE: Using date in order by

    [quote-0I think i have phrased my question wrongly, Actually i know about Clsutered and Non Clustered index, i just wanted to know the below part.

    uniquefier (since it is non-unique -...

  • RE: Using date in order by

    karthikeyan (8/13/2008)


    SQLGuru,

    Clustered index: order_id (assume int - 4 bytes), order_date (assume datetime - 8 bytes), uniquefier (since it is non-unique - 4 bytes). So 16 bytes for CI

    non-clustered...

  • RE: Which index will be used

    If you do test it out, please report on the total page counts for each index. Remember - more to it than just seek/scan speed/efficiency. More pages mean...

  • RE: Which index will be used

    GilaMonster (8/11/2008)


    I did a nice long calculation after someone asked me a very similar question in my TechEd session. Turned out, with a 100000 rows table, changing a nonclustered index...

  • RE: Query Performance Issue

    Pay a pro to remote into your box and tune the query for you, and then teach you how they did it. You will be going back and forth...

  • RE: Millions of records with no index! Query kills Transaction Log

    Old Hand: you have been - as I like to put it - flopping-and-twitching on this issue for what, 5 days + now. :w00t: May I recommend...

  • RE: Using date in order by

    Kewl! You just stumbled across the fasted IO possible - IO that isn't performed at all! :hehe:

  • RE: Using date in order by

    In the is scenario you might as well have the CLustered Index be your PK and I don't think it would need a uniqueifier because order_id has to be unique...

  • RE: Using date in order by

    Jeff Moden (8/6/2008)


    No problem... PK can be nonclustered.

    Yep. And then we have this situation:

    Clustered index: order_id (assume int - 4 bytes), order_date (assume datetime - 8 bytes), uniquefier...

  • RE: Using date in order by

    Steve F. (8/5/2008)


    Index on (id, date)

    That is ALMOST the 'most correct' answer. 🙂 I think the best answer is to have a CLUSTERED index on order_id, order_date. ...

  • RE: Issues with 400TB Database

    To my knowledge 400TB would be far and away the largest SQL Server database in existence. I suspect that is a typo, but if it isn't, you will need...

  • RE: Urgent help required !!!!!

    maruf24 (8/5/2008)


    Wat i hav found tht there is some change in java code as i m a dba ...

    ..... i dnt no wat are the changes has been made but...

  • RE: Partitioned Table Performance

    Gareth (8/5/2008)


    One simple question.

    The main advantage of partitioning is the parellel processing you gain from it correct?

    If so, then perhaps I need to make my partitions smaller so that multiple...

Viewing 15 posts - 5,026 through 5,040 (of 5,841 total)