Viewing 15 posts - 54,556 through 54,570 (of 59,089 total)
Matt... haven't tested it, but I agree... I think you've probably done it and it looks like the performance will outstripe any table solutions in this case... gonna have to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 5:48 pm
mrpolecat (10/18/2007)
declare @startdate datetime, @days int
set @startdate = '1/1/2007'
set...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Derek Karpinski (10/18/2007)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 5:31 pm
"Sister" table for the normally null columns... proper normalization of the table would be better.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Most of us get pretty ticked off about people that multipost...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic412362-5-1.aspx
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 4:36 pm
So... add a CASE to the calculated column and you're done!
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Partitioned view might be a possibility...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Kenneth Wilhelmsson (10/18/2007)
It will solve all your problems, no need for complex functions or anything else exotic.
The main problem: How do...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 7:59 am
the first solution didnt work. because of the Tally i didnt implement...
ps.
meanwhile the client "revised" some specs, so i do need these numbers now. but i still need to pull...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 7:53 am
Absolutely spot on, Grant!
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 7:49 am
... and, we have to help "application developers" learn how to program in T-SQL 😉 Although CLR's are helpful for those that don't really know T-SQL or set based...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 7:46 am
PS... can you be a bit more specific on what you're UDF does and post the code? UDF's are inherently NOT set-based... might be able to show you a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 1:19 am
Yeaup... that would also be one of the problems...
Change the EXISTS to a regular join on a "derived" table or a normal table and see if things don't pick up...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 1:17 am
Max Yasnytskyy (10/18/2007)[hrAre you trying to say that to solve this sort of problem any additional table is required?
Heck no... there are dozens of slower ways to do it :D...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 1:08 am
Max Yasnytskyy (10/17/2007)
I haven't ever used SQL Server 7 fortunately or unfortunately but what is wrong...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2007 at 1:05 am
Viewing 15 posts - 54,556 through 54,570 (of 59,089 total)