Viewing 15 posts - 52,186 through 52,200 (of 59,091 total)
Carl Federl and I did some pretty good testing a couple of years back and it very much supports what Matt says... it depends on the function, how it's written,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:57 am
Almost forgot... if you copy from 1 line ABOVE the code window to 1 line BELOW the code window, leading spaces will also be preseved.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:50 am
Heh... ya beat me to it... thanks, Matt.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:48 am
No, no! Copy the code and paste it into MS Word... do a Search and Replace...
Search for ^l (circumflex small-"L") and replace it with ^p (circumflex small-"P"). Then...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:44 am
The temp table is built in the first of the 5 queries I posted. Temp tables are session sensitive... they only "live" as long as the current session does....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:41 am
Heh... It's always good to have someone else confirm the test in their own way. Thanks, Ian.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 7:01 am
Rohit Chitre (3/4/2008)
When performance is said to be down number of users are deifinately high. But...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:55 am
I think you'll find that NEWID() is the exception to many rules that apply to other functions. Strange as it seems, it's the only true random number generator in...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:38 am
Roy Ernest (3/3/2008)
Jeff Moden (3/3/2008)
I'm curious... why would you use UNION ALL or OR on such a thing?
I believe the person wants to do the query based on the year...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:31 am
It's certainly no Panacea, but the following article has some insight as to why you can have performance problems with some UDF's in the SELECT list...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Test+Data/61572/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:29 am
Heh... it's only fitting, Jack. I stayed up too late to write it 😛
Thanks for both the feedback and the tip on the PDF stuff... I really appreciate...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:26 am
Ed is correct... and I go one further... what are the growth setting for your databases... I'm interested in all of the databases but I'm particularly interested in the growth...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:21 am
Not a problem... First, it can't be done in a view because of the temp table.
I'm not really using any form of recurrsion... I only stuff that meets the first...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:18 am
Muhammad Furqan (3/4/2008)
?????????????????
Whats the alternative then?
because alternative people over here are mentioning are not working for me.
"EXEC @sql;" doesnt work in a UDF and if put in a stored...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:12 am
ST! Man, good to see you're still around! I thought you dropped off the face of the planet.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 4, 2008 at 6:06 am
Viewing 15 posts - 52,186 through 52,200 (of 59,091 total)