Viewing 15 posts - 43,831 through 43,845 (of 59,097 total)
Paul White (5/10/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 10, 2009 at 9:23 am
RBarryYoung (5/9/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 10, 2009 at 8:33 am
I agree... the CLR solutions, especially that one, look pretty good.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 10, 2009 at 8:20 am
Ok... first of all, the following code assumes that you have a Tally table that has at least a count of 8000. I'm currently using a Tally table with...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Heh... oh my... :hehe: I believe I've found the secret as to why Cross Apply makes the Tally table solutions run so fast. It forces an unnatural ORDER...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Peter,
Sorry man. I tested against 1000 lines of 800 comma separated random numbers each in a VARCHAR(8000) environment... your code did the split into a table at a minute...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Phil Factor (5/1/2009)
...but their developers seem unable to fix things so they work like they used to.
Ouch.
They're doing all they can to put in a better solution ASAP. The problem...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Peter,
How do I determine what the optimal sector size in your splitter code should be?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Sorry, Peter... I got it. You were talking about the code in the previous post.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 8:06 pm
peter (5/5/2009)
Thanks for the information Jeff...care to take a quick look at what your string splitter evolved into as well?
Sorry Peter... I'm out of coffee and I'm not sure of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Sorry, Phil... the proc you attached came out as one huge line. I won't even start to look at something like that.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 7:44 pm
The artical that Paul White pointed us to about the peformance difference between SELECT and SET is pretty close to spot on percentage wise. I'm just not one to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Barkingdog (5/9/2009)
1. Temp 550GB was not enough. t-sql job ran into 550GB limit and failed.
2. Found statement causing the issue. The essence is shown below:
insert into
..
select distinct ....
....
from
tableA join...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Wow... that's a heck of a table. I am so not jealous of either that or the rigors they seem to be putting you through.
Thanks for the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 9:55 am
Manie Verster (5/9/2009)
You only put A-Z and not also a-z. How does that work?
Peter gave a pretty good description as to why. To simplify, the default for SQL Server...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 9, 2009 at 9:23 am
Viewing 15 posts - 43,831 through 43,845 (of 59,097 total)