Viewing 15 posts - 50,446 through 50,460 (of 59,091 total)
Heh.. "Oh no"... I've earned the nickname of the code I hate the most 😛
Glad it helped, Chris.
Do keep in mind that the others are correct, though... if you have...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:44 pm
...or 52,000...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Only thing left is to ask Karthik if he understands how it works and why... 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:34 pm
In that case, it may very well be that it's remembering a "bad" plan based on a previous query. That's why I use stored procedures instead of embedded SQL...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Philip Yale (5/19/2008)
I didn't actually ask why the copy to the heap was faster. In fact, the copy takes roughly the same length of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Michael Meierruth (5/18/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 5:58 pm
george sibbald (5/19/2008)
straight delete took 8 min 47 secs and created 4GB of tran log
crawler delete took 21:49 at batches of 100,000 (40MB of log) and 9:22...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Michael Meierruth (5/19/2008)
What do you make of this? George deleted 99.96% from a table holding 6.3 million rows - all in one go and in less than 9 minutes. Can...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Once I repair the error in the #2 code you provided, it gives me the following...
[font="Courier New"]-----------------------------------------------------
3.0
(1 row(s) affected)
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 7:19 am
You've obviously had to change the code to accomodate the new column name and the new table name... I'm pretty good, but without seeing the code, there's no way I...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 7:10 am
Not compared to the alternative's for generating multiple rows from a single row.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:39 am
First one is definitely "hidden RBAR"... it doesn't have an explicit loop, but it does have a correlated subquery and executes that correlated sub-query once for each row updated. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:24 am
ALZDBA (5/19/2008)
Robyn Page and Phil Factor published a CLR cribsheet athttp://www.simple-talk.com/dotnet/performance/net-performance-cribsheet/
It also mentiones the ms CLRProfiler.
You can download "CLR Profiler for the .NET Framework 2.0" at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=A362781C-3870-43BE-8926-862B40AA0CD0&displaylang=en
Heh... that's a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:08 am
As I said earlier, you have to define what "first" means first... what do you consider to be the correct order of the data? Can't help unless we know...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:03 am
In this case, since the same amount of data is being transmitted either way, it would probably be best to tax the client for the final format instead of having...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 19, 2008 at 6:00 am
Viewing 15 posts - 50,446 through 50,460 (of 59,091 total)