Viewing 15 posts - 30,961 through 30,975 (of 59,101 total)
Ok... since we had to use a loop for this, I tried to make it as efficient as possible.
First, the really nasty test data I posted in my previous post...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Yowch. I set up a spreadsheet to emulate the Quirky Update and I've had no joy getting something to work in a set based fashion for all scenarios. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 6:10 pm
rvasanth (2/26/2012)
I am not exactly showing it in the screen.I just selecting and moving to temp table and doing further processing. Sometime, i export it to a textfile.
Ok... that's...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 1:29 pm
Reading costs in the execution plan can be both good and bad. For example, if the old code took 5 minutes to run and the new code takes 5...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 7:38 am
dembones79 (2/28/2012)
The example given was just that, an example.
No problem. I get that. I just wanted to know if an idle FEL or two would be OK if...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 7:32 am
satishm94 (2/28/2012)
Hi guyscan u guys tell me the answers to these question …PLZ
At the risk of being rude, my answer is "No". Part of being a DBA or whatever...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 7:10 am
davidandrews13 (2/28/2012)
([ChangedDate]>='2008-01-01 00:00:00' AND [ChangedDate]<='2008-12-31 23:59:59')obviously, the year in the CheckConstraint changes depending on which table its against.
Also, your check constraint is incorrect. In theory, it's possible that something...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 6:53 am
davidandrews13 (2/28/2012)
The 7th table contains data from the year 2011 onwards, so currently i dont want to put a constraint on it.
You must include the constraint on the 7th table...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 28, 2012 at 6:49 am
Double post. Please post answers at the duplicate at the following URL.
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1258594-1633-1.aspx
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 8:16 pm
I guess my question would be, which is most important? To use all 4 FELs or to balance the load? If you have one file that is much...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 7:50 pm
It depends on what the "partitioning constraint/column" is setup as. If you have your tables setup by month and year, then your scenario would only look at 8 tables....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 4:21 pm
codebyo (2/25/2012)
Now I have a question for you more experienced guys and gals. 😀
If I use a tally table like the one below would that be alright?...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Eugene Elutin (2/27/2012)
Jeff Moden (2/24/2012)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 4:05 pm
bteraberry (2/26/2012)
Jeff, I'm a bit confused. Are you saying that parameter sniffing is more likely with dynamic sql?
No. Absolutely not. One of the statements made was that...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 27, 2012 at 7:05 am
Thanks for posting the answer to what your own fix was. It's sure to help some other folks.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 26, 2012 at 10:13 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 30,961 through 30,975 (of 59,101 total)