Viewing 15 posts - 48,451 through 48,465 (of 59,099 total)
Gaby,
Ok... I realize that you said "quick and dirty", but I keep looking at this article and wondering... why? :blink: Why would someone need to generate a giga-byte...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 4, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Heh... one person says it might be more performant, another says, with some vigor I may add, probably not. Neither has done a test and posted it. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Gary Johnson (9/3/2008)
rbarryyoung (9/3/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Heh... I've seen lot's of folks do it... they sit there with the spreadsheet open and try to run the code to populate. That will give such an error.
Also,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:57 pm
None of this would be a problem if you first inserted the data into a staging table and validated it.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:51 pm
bcronce (8/28/2008)
it is just a time stamp, thus all distinct
are time stamps guaranteed unique or 'just as long as you don't...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Grant Fritchey (9/3/2008)
Disk operations working the way they do, more spindles is better than fewer.
"Oh, oh, oh! More Power!"
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Check out the "AverageRecordSize" in the return of the following...
DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (0)
DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH TABLERESULTS
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:07 pm
j mangual (9/3/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Check out the column called "AverageRecordSize" in the following...
DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (0)
DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH TABLERESULTS
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm
I seen many, many people get burned by importing data directly to the final table. It would be much better to import it to a staging table and validate...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 5:46 pm
I gotta ask... why do you need to do this? What is the purpose of this?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Heh... understood... I think they call that "agile" programming and I hate it. 🙂
You said in your previous post that ID's 1-6 were singleton's... looking at the data you provided,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 5:16 pm
TheSQLGuru (9/3/2008)
Jeff Moden (9/2/2008)
Carl Federl (9/2/2008)
Jeff & GSquared:Did either of you get a chance to perform any additional analysis ?
No, I sure haven't... my apologies. Have a new job...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Chris Morris (9/3/2008)
However you can't add characters to a text value
You're right, Chris... my bad. I lost track of the basis of this thread. Thanks for the feedback.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
September 3, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 48,451 through 48,465 (of 59,099 total)