Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,026 through 2,040 (of 2,897 total)

  • RE: DBCC SHRINKFILE Aborted. Does it matter ?

    GilaMonster (12/31/2008)


    Be sure to rebuild all of your indexes afterwards. Shrink badly fragments indexes.

    Does that still apply if the indexes are on another drive ? I'm thinking...

  • RE: DBCC SHRINKFILE Aborted. Does it matter ?

    I'm running 2000 SP4

  • RE: Database running very slow

    Maybe you some processes that are blocking other processes ?? Hardware won't fix that. Do you see any blocking during slowness ?

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    This leads into the Fill Factor option. I think the default is 0 (effectively 100 %). In an application with lots of I/O, would 80% be better ?

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    Matt Miller (12/30/2008)


    I consider clustered indexes essential on damn near every table. About the only time a heap is better is when the data in the table is "write once,...

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    So, thanks to you guys my brain is finally starting to catch on !

    I could force the query to use the index, but then I run a future risk of...

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    GilaMonster (12/30/2008)


    homebrew01 (12/30/2008)


    Also, there is no clustered index on most of the tables in this application.

    Why not? Heaps are messy and have a number of downsides.

    Is there a downside to...

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    GilaMonster (12/30/2008)


    homebrew01 (12/30/2008)


    "isn't SQL doing 55 million seeks"

    I meant to say: Isn't SQL reading 55 million rows instead of reading 422,000 rows ?

    Take a mid-sized computer book with a comprehensive...

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    "isn't SQL doing 55 million seeks"

    I meant to say: Isn't SQL reading 55 million rows instead of reading 422,000 rows ?

    "Is that all the columns in the table?"

    No, I just...

  • RE: SQL Not Using the Index, sometimes

    GilaMonster (12/30/2008)


    homebrew01 (12/30/2008)


    Does SQL think that a table scan is better for the larger result set ?

    Yes. Because you're doing a select * , the index...

  • RE: Managing Active Directory Accounts for SQL

    Nevermind .... I asked the Network assistant and he set me up in 1 minute.

  • RE: Restoring tables from a full backup

    eseosaoregie (12/3/2008)


    I need to restore 2 tables from for a database for me to able to run some necessary queries for work. The IT engineers have said they can restore...

  • RE: Recommended path for advanced training?

    jeffkretz (12/2/2008)


    Jeff Moden (12/2/2008)[hrI wouldn't and haven't done that... I'd just as soon have the 40 interviews. I've met a lot of people who absolutely choke on a test...

  • RE: Why a Table Scan when there's an Index ?

    Sergiy (11/28/2008)


    Look at you WHERE clause:

    WHERE l.List_ID = @list_id

    AND CONVERT(int,l.CORP) = c.corp

    AND CONVERT(int,l.FRAN_TX_AR) = c.FTA

    Here is the answer.

    1st, you may safely change datatype...

  • RE: Why a Table Scan when there's an Index ?

    Sergiy (11/28/2008)


    Any reason why both indexes on Leads_DST are nonclustered?

    Make the index on LIST_ID clustered and you "parameter sniffing" problem will go away.

    This is a system I inherited and I'm...

Viewing 15 posts - 2,026 through 2,040 (of 2,897 total)