Viewing 15 posts - 40,096 through 40,110 (of 49,571 total)
Mark Douglass (4/1/2009)
I just want to understand why the behavior works the way it...
April 1, 2009 at 8:28 am
Peso (4/1/2009)
Not necessarily. With SQL 2008 comes the ability of Filtered Indexes.You can create an index on Bit1 = 1 only.
Sure you can, but that doesn't change the selectivity rules....
April 1, 2009 at 8:15 am
ABurton (3/31/2009)
A vendor has requested that I change all BIT fields to TINYINT because, as they say, the MSSQL Query Optimizer does not include BIT fields in its optimizations.
They're...
April 1, 2009 at 1:16 am
Mark Douglass (3/31/2009)
March 31, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Mark Douglass (3/31/2009)
March 31, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Santa Ana (3/31/2009)
Does the WITH (NOLOCK) option work with sql server 2005 ?
Yes
I do not understand why and how can this happen? ( a select with nolock is not...
March 31, 2009 at 3:00 pm
That kind of query is all too often a performance nightmare.
http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2009/03/19/catch-all-queries/
March 31, 2009 at 10:05 am
Please don't cross post. It just wastes peoples time and fragments replies.
No replies to this thread please. Direct replies to: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic686966-146-1.aspx
March 31, 2009 at 9:45 am
pedro.ribeiro (3/30/2009)
ok.Why does the GO (bacth breaker) brings more perfomance to que execution of the querys?
It shouldn't. Have you tested and times it?
If the first query fails and the second...
March 31, 2009 at 2:09 am
GO is a batch breaker. It indicates where the querying tool must break up batches to send to SQL Server. It is not a T-SQL command
DECLARE @i int
Set @i =...
March 30, 2009 at 3:17 pm
pedro.ribeiro (3/30/2009)
In this case, will the second query starts executing only, when the first one have already finished to execute?
yes
Or first it’s executed the first query and...
March 30, 2009 at 2:09 pm
You can check in sys.indexes, though note that index names don't have to be unique across the database, just unique on a table, so there may be two or more...
March 30, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Lynn Pettis (3/30/2009)
Just what do the users expect us to do???
Read their minds, pull out a magic wand and make the nasty error go away, of course.
😉
March 30, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Yup, that's SQL 2000, not 2005 at all.
I just need to check and see of the 'backdoor' admin access worked on SQL 2000.
March 30, 2009 at 9:54 am
Jeff Moden (3/28/2009)
March 30, 2009 at 9:36 am
Viewing 15 posts - 40,096 through 40,110 (of 49,571 total)