Viewing 15 posts - 44,686 through 44,700 (of 59,095 total)
The problem with your tests is that the time to display the results are being included. Also, as you saw in your own testing, converting the date to CHAR(8)...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 10, 2009 at 6:16 am
Mohit (3/9/2009)
Yaa Jeff go hunt down the 3rd party vendor :). Jeff likes dealing with them hehe.
Man, it just amazes me that people hire consultants/3rd parties without a contract...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Heh... I didn't say anything about evil intent... I just meant to say the original post is correct... the questions are definitely getting worse and more ignorant.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 10:53 pm
... And, if the combination of ID and Countries forms unique pairs, here's another way that's super easy to expand to additional countries...
SELECT ID
FROM #Test
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 10:49 pm
jmucherla (3/9/2009)
TABLE: TEST
ID Countries
100 IN
100 AU
100 GB
100 ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Bevan keighley (3/9/2009)
Select t3.ID From #TEST t3 Where t3.COUNTRIES in ('AU', 'IN')
except
Select t3.ID From #TEST t3 Where t3.COUNTRIES not in ('AU', 'IN')
Looks slower based on execution...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Think not of what to do to the row... think of what to do to the column... and, you don't have to do it all at once... Divide'n'Conquer. 😉
--===== Create...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 9:47 pm
You may want to consider loading the data into staging tables first. That way you don't have to worry about such stuff.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Look closer.... will someone actually have a table name of ['table1, table2']? As it currently stands, this code gives no returns... so what's the actual code and declarations?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 9:13 pm
A Little Help Please (3/9/2009)
I have restored a SQL 2000 DB on to a new SQL 2005 DB.
When I run:
select top 100 * from tbldeals
order by trade_date...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 9:07 pm
jmucherla (3/9/2009)
My table structure is like this.
TABLE: TEST
ID countries
100 IN, AU, GB, FR
101 GB, FR, IN
102 ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Shahrukh Khan (3/9/2009)
Our application developer/consultant encrypted them in the application.
So no problem, right? Just ask that person for the encryption key. If (s)he doesn't give it to you,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Heh... don't be sorry that you don't see it... be glad.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 8:33 pm
RBarryYoung (3/9/2009)
However, the most important thing to remember is that they ARE a small minority of the folks that we see and help.
And, finally, the thread devours itself...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Mike Levan (3/9/2009)
JeffProbably 1 hr for each step.
thanks
As the others have suggested, there's something wrong with that picture, Mike, and we probably won't be able to help from here.
First, check...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 9, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 44,686 through 44,700 (of 59,095 total)