Viewing 15 posts - 49,306 through 49,320 (of 59,091 total)
Looks ok to me... don't forget... you can use MAX in place of SUM for things that aren't numeric in nature provided they're unique.
And, thanks for the feedback.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 10:18 am
Angelindiego (7/9/2008)
Thanks...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 10:15 am
Christopher Stobbs (7/9/2008)
HI Jeff,Sorry you lost me on the column name there?
Sorry... I meant "SysComments"... not "SysColumns"... I've repaired the post where I made that error.
The key is that the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 10:13 am
It's ok, really... as suggested, it's a really great study in the human element. Some post with out reading, some argue they read, some read and still don't understand.
And,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 10:07 am
Gosh... this is an "adjacency" hierarchy on steroids... my feeling is that the tables are not correctly designed... there should be a table where ALL the managers and employees are...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 10:02 am
A sports MVP knows how to get one... serve the team and go the extra mile. Should be no different for SQL Server or any of the other categories...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:54 am
The only problem with that is if the function name sits on the "border" between two code segments in SysComments... you could miss a dependency that way. Works 99%...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:42 am
Non-sequential inserts on a clustered key are a huge problem. It makes for page splits and some very slow inserts once a page split has occured. You need...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:37 am
RJ (7/9/2008)
well! Each user has their own database & server. Not all users use common server.
So, you're going to send out scripts customized for each user?
You can write a batch...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:10 am
I haven't executed it (the last part of the code), but it looks correct. The first part of the code still has a "Dense_RANK" in it... 2k has no...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:05 am
Heh... Nope! Doesn't make a bit of sense... all the rows you posted are identical and there is no question column.
Please see the link in my signature before you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 9:02 am
rbarryyoung (7/9/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 8:57 am
You might want to double check... CROSS APPLY is a fancy name for "Correlated Subquery" and can have all the same problems with performance.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 8:43 am
I believe you're thinking of blocking.... deadlocks do not resolve themselves in a nice manner... there is always a "victim" that get's rolled back... always.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 8:39 am
Heh... if more than one user has to use it even just once, it's not "one time"... 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 9, 2008 at 8:38 am
Viewing 15 posts - 49,306 through 49,320 (of 59,091 total)