Viewing 15 posts - 40,336 through 40,350 (of 59,072 total)
The devil's in the data. Please read and heed the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Ya beat me to it on the POWER thing. Nicely done, Lynn.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:25 pm
real_cals (1/6/2010)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:21 pm
The Tally table is not a panacea and isn't good for this. Dynamic SQL would be good for this. So would an (ugh!) cursor.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:20 pm
ToddJames (1/6/2010)
select *,mycolumn=
CASE
WHEN mycolumn= 'PSI' THEN mbrproductcode
WHEN mycolumn= 'PPO' THEN 10001912
WHEN mycolumn= 'PP1' THEN 10001910
WHEN mycolumn= 'NOT'...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:17 pm
If you really are using 2k5, then NVARCHAR(MAX) will give you up to a billion characters. And MAX is not a number... NVARCHAR(MAX) with the word MAX is a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:15 pm
Nice, fast, little numbers table... Nice job, Arun.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 11:13 pm
I have to admit, Jason... you've confused even me on this one 😛 The query runs in about 13 ms according to the op... how will query tuning...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 9:52 pm
You say it has no delimiters... but does each row end with something like a carriage return or line feed?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 9:46 pm
GSquared (1/6/2010)
GilaMonster (1/6/2010)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2010 at 9:01 am
Heh... probably the same as me... found something slightly interesting and didn't read the date... 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 5, 2010 at 5:52 pm
lmu92 (1/4/2010)
Thanx again, Jeff
Anytime, Lutz... thanks for the feedback.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 4, 2010 at 3:56 pm
The reason why it took so long is because, in the presence of a triangular join, it must spawn over 405,000,450,000 rows. To put it more succinctly, it spawned...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 4, 2010 at 9:24 am
Step one would be to prove my conjecture on the problem wrong... print out the dynamic SQL using PRINT @SQL1+@SQL2+@SQL3 and copy the results (will be SQL) to another query...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 4, 2010 at 9:19 am
tm3 (1/3/2010)
After further testing, I have found the following strange situation with the procedure edits you provided:
1) if I use a date range of start date: 10/03/2005 end...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 4, 2010 at 1:05 am
Viewing 15 posts - 40,336 through 40,350 (of 59,072 total)