Viewing 15 posts - 50,011 through 50,025 (of 59,099 total)
rbarryyoung (6/16/2008)
Jeff Moden (6/15/2008)
rbarryyoung (6/15/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Pierre Boucher (6/16/2008)
CURSOR (LOCAL...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Thanks... now we're cooking... I'm on my way to work... I'll take a look at this tonight.
Hmmm... Glad this is SQL Server 2k5... makes it a lot easier to solve...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 7:26 am
jcrawf02 (6/16/2008)
rbarryyoung (6/15/2008)
Jeff Moden (6/15/2008)
What's wrong with a good ol' concatenation function that works in 2k and 2k5?
Are we thinking of the same thing? I thought the concatenation function...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 7:22 am
jcrawf02 (6/16/2008)
IMHO, if it's going to break in the first strong wind, then it's not completed.
That's more like it and that's part of what I'm talking about...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 7:06 am
george sibbald (6/16/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 7:03 am
Wilfred van Dijk (6/16/2008)
Why write some unreadable code in order to avoid cursors?
Why do you think it must be unreadable?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 7:00 am
Then, don't buy a book... start working problems posed on this forum. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 6:22 am
Oh no... Correlated sub-queries and their equivelant of Cross Apply are nothing more than a form of hidden RBAR which is usually as slow as a cursor and sometimes slower...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 6:15 am
"If we let our employer know of the trade-off between delivery schedule and future-proofing/performance tweaking, they can make an informed decision."
I've found that that usually takes more time than just...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 6:11 am
Please see the following to get the best performance out of a concatenation function...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Test+Data/61572/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 16, 2008 at 5:56 am
michaela (6/15/2008)
What I would do:...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 15, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Sorry folks... I've repaired the link that BitBucket was talking about and I've also included it here...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/TSQL/62867/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 15, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Ummm.... SysProcesses has a DBID column...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 15, 2008 at 7:21 pm
kinnon_2000 (6/15/2008)
I dont know of a sql server query that could concatinate multiple fields from a tabe, as a join, into a single field. Can that be done?
Absolutely... see...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 15, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 50,011 through 50,025 (of 59,099 total)