Query said:

...WHERE 1=0...

Comment in front of the query said:

-- WHERE 1 = 0

No explanation for it at all.

• This reply was modified 6 years, 9 months ago by Grant Fritchey.

I have a bit of bittersweet news. After more than a decade of coaching youth soccer I am finally hanging up the whistle (although I never actually use one...

Just saw a joke.

Coach calls over little 8 yo player:

Coach: You know that I substitute everyone so you call get some time to play right?

Player: Yes

Coach: And you know we're...

sys.dm_db_index_usage_stats would be a good way to generally understand how data is accessed. It's not perfect. Here's a good article on it.

This is a resource I trust very much talking about this topic. His suggestion is to change the keys every two years. Read the article for more details.

SQL Server will grab the amount of memory it has available and continue to grab more of that to the max. It does this completely automatically, stopping only at the...

Yeah, agreed. In fact, it's a great practice to have a different account administering SQL Server instances on the box and one administering the operating system. It's the right kind...

So, memory is different. What else? Number of processors? Max Degree of Parallelism? Cost Threshold for Parallelism? ANSI connection settings? These are just the top server settings that lead to...

You could keep a second copy of the database around. That will give you a comparison point. You have to sacrifice storage, but disks are pretty cheap.

Pretty much. Yes.

There are some exceptions. We're still working out how to deal with Azure SQL Database cross-database query setup. A couple of other issues along those very specific lines....

Nope. Just look at the logical reads. That's the amount of memory being used by the query.

It's likely that it's a version thing then, and certainly, likely to be 2014+ since that's when the cardinality estimation engine changed. Funny enough, Pinal's advice is the opposite of...

Thanks for the kind words. Really not doing that much, but thank you.

The easiest way to answer this question is to use Extended Events. The specific event you'd be looking...

It's to do the most efficient locking possible. Depending on what you're doing, a table lock may be more efficient. To be sure about all this, we'd need to gather...

There are lots of tools for doing health checks. I just found this one: https://mitchwheat.com/sqlfrontline/