Viewing 15 posts - 43,126 through 43,140 (of 59,098 total)
dineshbornleo (7/4/2009)
Hi Guru'sIs there any chance to move the particular rows from one table to other...?if yes..how do we do that..?
Thanx in advance..
A better question would be, why do you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Digs (7/4/2009)
Here is another tab split function that I pulled from a SQL 2000 book by Andrew Novick : Transact SQL UDFsWhich is better Lynns or Andrews ??? 😎
We've given...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Apparently, it's not urgent since there's been no response for more than 17 hours. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 7:06 pm
A single poorly written stored procedure, view, or UDF can bring a server to it's knees. I'd recommend running SQL Profiler and find out which one it is so...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Even if you don't put a database or SQL slant on it, it's still appropriate...
"One" by 3 Dog Night
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:51 pm
In the face of bad software, improperly written T-SQL, and poorly designed databases, the rating of the hardware and it' support systems means absolutely nothing.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:38 pm
My apologies, Brian, but you've been "exiled" way too long and have forgotten the meaning of it all... as have many.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:26 pm
GilaMonster (7/4/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Eswin (6/26/2009)
I want to fetch one row at a time and then satisfy the conditions following while @@row_count 0 and while @@fetch_status = 0 .
That would be the problem......
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:21 pm
mjarsaniya (7/4/2009)
sorry
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 6:09 pm
You bet, Wayne. Thanks for answering my seemingly unrelated questions. They go far in helping me understand the needs of folks so I can setup certain tests for...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 12:36 pm
WayneS (7/4/2009)
Jeff Moden (7/4/2009)
WayneS (7/3/2009)
@jeff - would you mind trying out this little piece of code and let me know how fast it is on your "computer in a deathbox"?:-D
No...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 12:07 pm
WayneS (7/3/2009)
And, just to be complete, I ran this test again including Lynn's CTE method (DelimitedSplit):XML: 1571/1100/1350/1134/1130
Tally: 1429/1313/1306/1317/1288
CTE: 6283/6221/6292/6445/6569
Heh... looks like the Tally table won twice there.
But, I agree... joining...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Jeff Moden (7/4/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 11:27 am
Last but not least, Wayne... I ran your code and the XML section returns nothing. Perhaps the forum ate some of your code. Can you attach the code,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 4, 2009 at 11:22 am
Viewing 15 posts - 43,126 through 43,140 (of 59,098 total)