Viewing 15 posts - 57,016 through 57,030 (of 59,067 total)
Wayne,
Whether I agree with the premise of using WITH (NOLOCK) or not, your post did what all good posts are supposed to do... spark pro/con conversation.
Thought I'd reward you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 25, 2007 at 8:29 am
Tony Rogerson's blog he has code which demonstrates this. http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/tonyrogerson/archive/2006/11/16/1345.aspx |
That code, once you actually get the data...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 25, 2007 at 7:18 am
James,
Would you mind posting both versions? I'd like to do a little testing to see what's up... thanks.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 23, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Ramesh,
Thanks for the feedback...
Unless your payroll process has hierarchical payments such as those found in an MLM, I'm pretty sure that we can help you figure out a way to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 23, 2007 at 7:19 am
Heh... ya... hence the need for the article. Thanks for the reminder ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 22, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Its a bit difficult... I have a hard time thinking in a non-set based fashion when trying to write the cursor examples ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 22, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Then you need to use something like what DC Clark posted based on a date column...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 22, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Thanks for the feedback, Gova... much appreciated.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 22, 2007 at 4:55 pm
What does an SP do that needs to execute "at least 200+" times per user?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 21, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Not listed? It's listed as "Set Option Changed in Batch" and "Set Option Changed". And they kinda tell you how to build a test... create a proc with theoption you want...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 21, 2007 at 9:11 pm
One of the other problems with Cursors AND While-Loops is the number of resources (mostly cpu time) they use when compared to properly written setbased code... the following example code is...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 21, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Shoot... didn't mean to make it sound like I took it any other way... guess I need to use more smiley faces ![]()

--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 21, 2007 at 9:06 am
Serqiy and Barry,
Heh... I finally drank enough coffee and now I get it... and I agree. Serqiy is absolutely correct.
Actually, my fault... All I saw was "the latest 50 rows"...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 21, 2007 at 8:56 am
Heh... thanks for the feedback, Remi.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 20, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Thanks for the feedback, folks. Glad it helped.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 20, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 57,016 through 57,030 (of 59,067 total)