Viewing 15 posts - 36,841 through 36,855 (of 59,072 total)
Yep... I was getting similar results (didn't want to post my results because I didn't want to "taint" people's opinions).
This is why I say I'm looking for a much better...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 6:45 am
Yep... understood especially on the plan. And thanks for the code. I'll go though it tonight.
I did make an entry on Brad's forum that there might be something...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 6:38 am
I need to ask just because you're "new" to SQL. Are you 100% sure that you're using at least SQL Server 2005?
And, yeah... I agree. Wayne does an...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 4:56 am
Dave Ballantyne (9/13/2010)
Brad Schulz has done a nice round uphttp://bradsruminations.blogspot.com/2010/08/integer-list-splitting-sql-fable.html
I'll have to revisit that one sometime in the near future because a proper Tally table solution is between 5 and...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 4:36 am
Peter Brinkhaus (9/13/2010)
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.Split8KX_Inline(@Parameter VARCHAR(MAX), @Delimiter VARCHAR(1))
RETURNS TABLE
WITH SCHEMABINDING
AS
RETURN
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 4:28 am
Trevor R Udden (9/13/2010)
Did I miss a major citiation at the end of your article? You might want to try not blantly plagirizing others work. The...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 13, 2010 at 4:20 am
p.s. Sorry that I don't document my code or anything and that I don't follow any formatting rules... I'm new at this... :-P:-D:hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 11:08 pm
For your convenience, here's a copy of the Tally table I used. You can use it in Temp DB without it interfering with your own...
--===== Do this in a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 11:06 pm
There are 3 places that control what the table looks like. Of course, two of those are SELECT TOP (X) and the comments next to each of those explain...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 11:01 pm
WayneS (9/12/2010)
If you will post your sample data creation, I'll give it a test...
Coming right up...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:52 pm
The "best plan" is dictated only by four things and only two of those really matter where performance is concerned...
1. Hardware - Nill effect. Double the speed on...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:49 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (9/11/2010)
Why not have something like that with the optimizer for query plans.
I believe because it's mostly not worth it. How many query plans do you want the optimizer...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:40 pm
I strongly suspect that 4.5 million sales transactions per second requires a fair bit of pretty expensive hardware and a whole lot of parallelism. I'm pretty sure that most...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:34 pm
It's also odd that you posted this in "Anything that is NOT about SQL" because this problem is all about SQL. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:22 pm
d_s_man (9/9/2010)
I have a partitioned table with 175188842 rows. Any updates to any of the rows is setting certain columns to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 12, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 36,841 through 36,855 (of 59,072 total)