Viewing 15 posts - 49,036 through 49,050 (of 59,102 total)
Thanks for the clarifications, folks... between what has already been posted and what I found at the links included in the following, it turns out that you can have as...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2008 at 9:08 am
Outstanding, Ian... that's just what I was looking for. Thanks for the very quick reply, too!:)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2008 at 8:44 am
kubilay husmenoglu (7/31/2008)
Hi, I have exactly the same problem with OSQL.Does anybody has a solution
I'd recommend you start a new thread for this... it'll get more attention.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2008 at 4:58 am
Ross McMicken (7/31/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2008 at 4:54 am
Oh, yeah... almost forgot... "In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is King!"... That's why most people look at the Execution Plan and believe in it. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I may have to write an article about it someday... I've found that WHERE NOT IN beats the OUTER JOIN type of exclusion, WHERE NOT EXISTS correlated subqueries, and a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Heh... reminds me of a dictionary... how can you check the spelling on a word using a dictionary without a bit of luck?
I agree with Matt... UNPIVOT is...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Matt Miller (7/30/2008)
Jeff Moden (7/30/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 8:41 pm
usman.tanveer (7/30/2008)
Can using (Nolock) or (ReadPass) help gaining performance benefits for select queries?
In my point of view may be we could......like in my scenario......db is accessed by multiple...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 8:21 pm
steveb (7/30/2008)
No worries,you could use the Left and Right functions.
I am not aware of any performance difference between the two and couldn't find anything aobut it on BOL.
LEFT...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 7:47 pm
usman.tanveer (7/30/2008)
These tables are the main tables of the Db and contains alot of data. Also multiple...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Angelindiego,
If done incorrectly, your CASE statement will turn out to be RBAR on steroids in the form of a correlated subquery. If you want, please post your final code...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Since update does not qualify as a non-logging bulk operation, I'd say you'd have to temporarily put the DB in the SIMPLE recovery mode and do the update in, say,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Matthew O'Gorman (7/30/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Heh... someone asked me why I've tried to specialize in behind-the-scenes-batch-programing in SQL Server... I believe I'll refer them to this thread. 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 30, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 49,036 through 49,050 (of 59,102 total)