Well you shouldn't be using SELECT * in production code. Fix your selects to select just the columns they need in the order they need and then you won't have...

Since SQL Server doesn't have nested transactions (just syntax which makes you think it does), there's no advantage. A transaction should be as small as possible while still ensuring the...

Ask him why, given the known performance problems that table variables often cause.

Why?

The order of...

Informal survey before I make a fool of myself in an article (again)

Do you get the feeling that IT people, especially ones at the top-end of the field, are too...

SQLJay (7/2/2015)

---

We have a 2 physical CPUs that are 4 cores each with hyper threading enabled. When looking through the task manager, under the performance tab, I see 16 CPU...

I haven't run it (busy packing up at work), but as a guess, do you need a PARTITION BY S_ID in your OVER clauses? At the moment, they're working across...

yb751 (7/2/2015)

---

--When you want to do this

SET @query_from = @query_from + CHAR(10) + ' JOIN ' + @TableVariable + ' on ABC.ID = ' + @TableVariable + '.ID '...

Unlikely there will be an official demo DB until after launch. Features are still changing, we're still in preview. It's no impossible that queries written now won't work come release.

Use...

Do you understand why and how it works?

Unless you have a really, really, really old machine there (as in well over 10 years old) or a VM that a single virtual core has been assigned to, you've...

Would not be...

Which doesn't help me to test queries that I write 😉

Something like

SELECT <stuff>

FROM Clients c

WHERE c.idclient IN (SELECT cc.idclient FROM...

Without sample data or a table to test against it's a guess, but you probably want to use an EXISTS or an IN, not a join.

Regular working day tomorrow, trying to catch up on writing and some presentations over the weekend, maybe some Skyrim too.