Viewing 15 posts - 29,941 through 29,955 (of 59,101 total)
RBarryYoung (5/17/2012)
!!! How did you guys get in front of me?!?
DBCC TIMEWARP 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 3:13 pm
Lynn Pettis (5/17/2012)
CptCrusty1 (5/17/2012)
.....
AND (CASE WHEN COL_1 = 25 AND COL_2 <> 30 THEN 1
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 3:12 pm
SQL Kiwi (5/17/2012)
Jeff Moden (5/17/2012)
Heh... I have the proof. I just haven't posted it. Time for someone else to prove it besides me. 🙂
Well that doesn't really help...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Elizabeth.Block (5/16/2012)
The indexes weren't fragmented but they weren't good either.
Can you be more specific about that please? For example, how do you know they weren't good if they weren't...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 11:42 am
SQL Kiwi (5/17/2012)
Jeff Moden (5/17/2012)
Shifting gears, just changing it to a While Loop using the exact same logic will make it more efficient.
It's not like you to make such a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 11:26 am
RBarryYoung (5/17/2012)
Though that description does raise some disturbing genetic questions ... 😀
BWAAA-HAAAA!!!!... dunno 'bout all that... have you taken a good look at your most recent avator? 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 11:24 am
dwain.c (5/17/2012)
I get it! Change RBAR in your avatar to Dwain.C and there you have it.
Heh... considering the tagline in your signature, I do have to question why you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 7:46 am
dwain.c (5/17/2012)
Seriously, I'm smiling (:-D) because I figure that if I can stir up the emotions of the staunchly rigid and proper SQL aristocracy then I've done my job.
ABSOLUTELY...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 7:38 am
SQL Kiwi (5/17/2012)
It still seems that your issues are more with the author (and Craig Freedman) rather than me.
Correct. I didn't mean to make it sound like I was...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 7:08 am
Elliott Whitlow (5/15/2012)
Jeff,You gotta give 'em cred for calling back that takes some stones.
CEWII
Heh... gotta give me some credit, as well. It took some stones of my own...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 6:43 am
Sorry... the way my comment relates to the articles you cited and to Dwaine's article is that, while recursion is a mathematically sound way of expressing a problem, none of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 6:28 am
SQL Kiwi (5/16/2012)
Craig Freedman has a couple of great posts covering how recursive CTEs work:http://blogs.msdn.com/b/craigfr/archive/2007/10/25/recursive-ctes.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/craigfr/archive/2007/11/07/recursive-ctes-continued.aspx
I do wish folks would do a comparison against the equivalent While Loops to see just...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 5:29 am
No problem. Thanks.
I ran the test you included in the Blog entry and actually did get seeks at the .5% and .3% levels instead of scans, but that still...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 5:09 am
GilaMonster (5/17/2012)
Jeff Moden (5/16/2012)
Are you suggesting that if I use something like a tenth of a table that a scan is virtually guaranteed?
If you are using a non-covering index, then...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 4:45 am
Thanks, folks... I'll take a deeper look.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 17, 2012 at 4:26 am
Viewing 15 posts - 29,941 through 29,955 (of 59,101 total)