Viewing 15 posts - 51,826 through 51,840 (of 59,091 total)
alorenzini (3/13/2008)
02/29/2008 11:59:59 PM
So when I run this:
SET @MonthStartDt = DATEADD(month, DATEDIFF(month, 0, @StartDate), 0)
Set @MonthEndDt = DATEADD(month,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:55 am
Heh... it's 'cause I copied directly from your post 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:51 am
Oh boy! Someone said "Pork chop"! Let me get my magic sling... 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:50 am
Heh... it's what separates all these "Hi, I'm new to DBA" people from the real DBA's.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:48 am
The real users will show up at your desk in a panic... have the porkchops ready... 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:46 am
Folks, just to be clear, you might be able to create a permanent view on the fly and drop it at the end of the proc, but there is no...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:43 am
John Mitchell (3/13/2008)
Jeff Moden (3/13/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 9:38 am
Matt Miller (3/13/2008)
the process requiring that space would have aborted.
That would also make it easier to find... dummy that did it would scream out loud 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 8:09 am
... or, you can just use the power of UNION...
SELECT customer1
from yourtable
where customer1 like 'sm%' UNION
SELECT customer2
from yourtable
where customer2 like 'sm%' UNION
SELECT customer3
from yourtable
where customer3 like 'sm%'
Real key...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 8:05 am
Lynn Pettis (3/13/2008)
Again, the cost is relative to the batch its self, and it is quite possible that the cost of the query (relative to the batch) is higher.
I've found...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 8:01 am
Matt Miller (3/12/2008)
Jeff Moden (3/10/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 7:58 am
Yes... same problem as with Global Temp Tables... if same job runs more than once, BOOM on table creation or YECH on what happens to the data because more than...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 7:54 am
Do a Google search for sp_MSForEachTable...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 7:39 am
Jack Corbett (3/13/2008)
Nice article. I like the fact that is clearly takes you from start to finish and offers a solution to a commonly encountered problem.
Agreed... and test data...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 7:35 am
I have sp2 installed and I noticed the same thing an a good number of queries that end up using a loop join...
I've never trusted % if batch, anyway......
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 13, 2008 at 7:31 am
Viewing 15 posts - 51,826 through 51,840 (of 59,091 total)