Viewing 15 posts - 49,801 through 49,815 (of 59,102 total)
rbarryyoung (6/22/2008)
Jeff Moden (6/22/2008)
I'm trying to find out if there's a way to do it using a single Pivot.
Heh. What were we saying just yesterday about posters and their...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 23, 2008 at 5:22 am
Jeffrey Williams (6/22/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 23, 2008 at 5:18 am
Thanks, Jeff! Great example of how to do it with 2 derived tables... 🙂
Does anyone know how to do it using a single pivot or are we relegated to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Heh... in this situation, you're rebuilding the view! It's gonna recompile no matter what... 😉 Works fine in production code especially in 2k where there's no such thing...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Just in case someone wants to "play", here's the Cross Tab code I'm trying to duplicate with a single pivot...
SELECT Company,
Year,
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:44 pm
sriharivittal1 (5/28/2008)
Can some one provide Sample Code?
You want sample code? Then provide some sample data. Please see, read, understand, and follow the article in the link in my...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 4:33 pm
venki (6/22/2008)
I tried to use the for loop in my stored procedure but I haven't found it's working and...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Whether you use SELECT * or not, if you want to see the table changes in a view, you have to recompile the view. Like Barry said, this is...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Save us all some time... post the stored procedure that you're trying to convert into a view.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Jeff W...
SELECT * works perfect on these type of "pass through" or "surrogate views". You can go through the process of naming all the columns if you want, but...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Bilal (6/22/2008)
I expect about 1000 rows to return , and their is one type of index defined which is traffic1each table have millions of records
any thing else ?
Yes...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 9:32 am
Ummm... you guys are getting awfully serious about this... you do realize that the article was written and first posted about 3 years ago, huh? 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:59 am
Ok... thanks...
Does BitBucket's code do it for you or do you still need help with something?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:56 am
Even though I don't like cursors and I don't use them, that would be the first thing to change... I'd have them stop deprecating stuff that works. That's part...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:54 am
JRJ (6/22/2008)
That's possible. How can I change a views definition in a proc? Also I am deeling with duplicate indexes, is that ok?thanks
A view's definition can easily be changed using...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2008 at 8:48 am
Viewing 15 posts - 49,801 through 49,815 (of 59,102 total)