Viewing 15 posts - 8,086 through 8,100 (of 59,091 total)
Awesome! Looking forward to seeing it, John!
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2019 at 2:10 pm
What do you get when you write it with straight criteria instead of selecting from the sub-query?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2019 at 1:51 pm
Of course, that recommendation also comes with the warning that if the hashbytes are different, then the rows are guaranteed to be different. However (and you know this...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2019 at 1:42 pm
SELECT CONCAT('
SELECT ''', QUOTENAME(t.TABLE_SCHEMA), '.', QUOTENAME(t.TABLE_NAME), ''' [TABLE_NAME], COUNT(*) COUNT
FROM (SELECT ',x.c, '
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 11:22 pm
well the PK alone doesn't indicate real world duplicates as in you can create an index column of sorts but that doesn't solve potential duplicates and even where there...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 11:16 pm
Why do you need to do this? Any table with a unique index on it, even a non-clustered one, will not have duplicates in it. Same goes for any table...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 7:50 pm
Look in the upper right corner of the display for "Write for us". Click and follow your nose.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 7:43 pm
Duplicate post. Please... no posts here. No need to split up possible answers. Go to the first one in process at https://www.sqlservercentral.com/forums/topic/audit-failed-successful-login-log-4#post-3709164
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 4:02 pm
Duplicate post. Please... no posts here. No need to split up possible answers. Go to the first one in process at https://www.sqlservercentral.com/forums/topic/audit-failed-successful-login-log-4#post-3709164
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 4:02 pm
Duplicate post. Please... no posts here. No need to split up possible answers. Go to the first one in process at https://www.sqlservercentral.com/forums/topic/audit-failed-successful-login-log-4#post-3709164
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 4:00 pm
I've not worked with Dynamics... is that one of those MS applications/databases that uses random GUIDs for keys?
Yes!
With database designs that would make Codd break down weeping. They...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 3:39 pm
I've not worked with Dynamics... is that one of those MS applications/databases that uses random GUIDs for keys?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 2:39 pm
In mean time i have found solution.
Tnx guys
BR
Two way street here... what solution did you come up with?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 19, 2019 at 2:36 pm
In that case, use a non-clustered index on the hashkey. It will be more narrow than a clustered index and will run much more quickly.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 18, 2019 at 9:37 pm
Wonderful solution! Congratulations!
Hmmm... wait for it...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 18, 2019 at 9:32 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 8,086 through 8,100 (of 59,091 total)