Viewing 15 posts - 43,966 through 43,980 (of 59,097 total)
Paul White (5/1/2009)
I have *just* realized the point of Lynn's solution!
It avoids the I/O on the custom tally table completely.
Not my finest moment.
Luckily it won't be available on...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I still want to know what the CLR procedure is going to do. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 6:52 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 1, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Florian Reischl (5/1/2009)
TheSQLGuru (5/1/2009)
Flo, are you getting your reads from SET STATISTICS IO ON? IIRC UDFs don't report IO correctly in this manner. Try getting them with Profiler.
Good...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 11:14 am
I'll take a look, Paul. Thanks.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 11:07 am
JohnG (5/1/2009)
1. Create it as an Indexed Organized Table (IOT) using the ORGANIZATION INDEX clause. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 10:53 am
Almost forgot... the reason why I don't use the code windows anymore is because, although they may work fine with FireFox, they suck when using IE7. The remove blank...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 6:31 am
Florian Reischl (4/30/2009)
We had a performance issue in conjunction with STUFF? Maybe, I'm just gone blank... :doze:
Maybe it's just me and I'm thinking of the wrong person. It was...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 1, 2009 at 6:27 am
JohnG (4/30/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 5:05 pm
That would be the ANSI standard for UPDATE... subqueries for each field(s) being updated. If you do such a thing in SQL Server, the duration of the update increases...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Heh... I wonder if the ANSI committee like pork chops. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 1:20 pm
RBarryYoung (4/30/2009)
Chris Morris (4/30/2009)
@Barry - get well soon mate, that sounds like some horrible stuff you're dealing with. You will be hugely missed while you're away for the op.
Thanks, Chris....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 10:44 am
DKG (4/30/2009)
Of couse this is not a good practive to take backup on DVDs
I'd say the jury is still out on that one for smaller systems. With compression, you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 10:29 am
Well stated... but doesn't that show that embracing OOP took even longer for most folks? 😉 I believe that was the real point trying to be made. :hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 10:26 am
Florian Reischl (4/30/2009)
Jeff Moden (4/29/2009)
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63003/Thanks Jeff!
Great article! Am I allowed to refer to?
Greets
Flo
Absolutely.
I also have some code for you on cleaning a string. I've repaired the performance problem...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 30, 2009 at 10:22 am
Viewing 15 posts - 43,966 through 43,980 (of 59,097 total)