Viewing 15 posts - 57,151 through 57,165 (of 59,101 total)
I think I'd use a permanent working table before I used a Global Temp table...
Sol, the confusing part of this whole question is... don't you know each user can...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2006 at 2:10 pm
Sure... why not? Perhaps they're trying to make a delivery route list to cut down on the number of stops that a truck has to make where street numbers and...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2006 at 1:44 pm
Since you have no Primary Key, I have to agree... might be a problem with the table design a bit...
Anyway... take the query you posted...
select count(1)
from CL_PRODUCT_ATTRIBUTE
where ATRRIBUTE_ID = @attrib_id
and...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Ok, thanks... isn't that the way? Company buys something and that won't let you use it which forces you to revert to undocumented features in SQL Server...
This will work in...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2006 at 6:59 am
Thanks John... appreciate the feedback!
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2006 at 6:33 am
This is pretty cool... we have several complex, multi-step store procedures and some folks have put some pretty complex logging procedures in them just so they can query a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2006 at 10:43 pm
How simple... how elegant... I never knew you could do this... nicely done.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2006 at 10:22 pm
We sure don't need a cursor for this and I'm not sure you could do it any faster or easier in the client
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2006 at 9:40 pm
What... replace one form of RBAR (pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row By Agonizing Row") in the form of a correlated sub-query for another form? I don't know...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2006 at 7:22 pm
Sure... right after you tell us why you can't use xp_filesize so we don't recommend something similar...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Nice article, David, as usual...
As you are aware, I suspect that any performance differences will only occur where joins of different data types occur due to implicit conversions... but...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 18, 2006 at 5:46 am
Yep... you're supposed to know what the bad rows are BEFORE you begin the transfer. ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 18, 2006 at 5:25 am
Heh... my turn Remi... how come no Tally table here? "I'm surprised you didn't think of it" ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 16, 2006 at 8:45 am
Here... shoe-horn a call to this function into my previous code to get rid of all but the required "pattern" of characters...
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.CleanData(@sText AS VARCHAR(8000),@pattern varchar(8000))
RETURNS VARCHAR(8000)
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 15, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Thanks for the feedback Jules... I always wonder if anyone actually runs these things ![]()
Like I said, how long does it take on...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 15, 2006 at 5:31 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 57,151 through 57,165 (of 59,101 total)