Viewing 15 posts - 19,576 through 19,590 (of 22,202 total)
Oh wow! I wasn't aware of that. Sorry.
I haven't used the thing in years, or needed one. I guess that's a good thing.
September 12, 2008 at 9:06 am
Another option, not necessarily a good one, is to add a version column to your PK and then only do inserts. You can then do one of two things. Insert...
September 12, 2008 at 8:17 am
agatti (9/12/2008)
I want a great big dumpster and permission to throw whatever I want into it.
Or whoever...
September 12, 2008 at 7:17 am
Red Gate also offers a log reading product. It works pretty well.
Gail's right though, while something like Red Gate's Log Explorer can help, auditing is a more intentional act...
September 12, 2008 at 6:05 am
Just a side note, a hash match isn't necessarily a bad thing. It can be the best way to retrieve the data, depending on the data involved.
September 12, 2008 at 6:03 am
Very little code to work with here, but have you looked at the ROW_NUMBER function in Books Online? I think that might help you do what you want.
If not, post...
September 12, 2008 at 6:00 am
Gayathri.Varadarajan (9/12/2008)
...Also the business functionality is so that the PK has to be updated...
At this point, you're totally violating the idea of a primary key. You may have a unique...
September 12, 2008 at 5:54 am
Many happy returns of the day, Steve.
For myself, a good bottle of single malt scotch is all I need for happy birthday... or a happy any other day for that...
September 12, 2008 at 5:42 am
matt stockham (9/11/2008)
Grant Fritchey (9/8/2008)
September 11, 2008 at 2:39 pm
No. I'm not getting this one. Sorry. I've only done about four installs so far (not counting CTP's), but no issues at all... So far... knock wood.
September 10, 2008 at 2:29 pm
I'll shut up now and go and stand in the corner.
September 10, 2008 at 11:20 am
Without a doubt it's going to be better than reading twice every time, definately. I've had to fix that problem WAY to often myself. I was just curious how many...
September 10, 2008 at 8:47 am
Yeah, you can do that without recompiles. Does it cause excessive scans or reads in the table since it's searching for a PK that doesn't exist every single time?
September 10, 2008 at 8:26 am
It's not a huge deal to do this, but it will result in recompiles on the procedure since the execution plan for an UPDATE and one for an INSERT are...
September 10, 2008 at 7:23 am
TRY/CATCH won't help performance, but it will make your code easier to write & maintain.
Can you post an execution plan? If possible, the actual execution plan not the estimated one.
September 10, 2008 at 6:56 am
Viewing 15 posts - 19,576 through 19,590 (of 22,202 total)