Viewing 15 posts - 1,216 through 1,230 (of 2,044 total)
my guess is an entry in the param.txt file
microsoft released an update of SQLIOStress called sqliosim: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/231619
September 6, 2007 at 2:20 am
clustered indexes are more suited to range-seek (like date ranges). (benefit of having a sequential IO feed because the data is ordered sequential). If you only fetch 1 item at...
September 6, 2007 at 1:53 am
You could try this with the BULK INSERT command depending on complexity.
September 3, 2007 at 4:49 am
You can perform a transaction log backup. It automatically truncates the inactive portion of the transaction log.
September 3, 2007 at 4:37 am
I would start with reducing the batch size.
It was needed at work to reduce it from 500 to 100 because our subscriber was slower in IO
Found the kb:
September 2, 2007 at 12:19 pm
It could be timing out. You can change batchsize & timeout in the replication agent profiles.
September 2, 2007 at 4:58 am
Use
execute spAddOpptest @OppName=...
Otherwise it tries to fill the first parameter @OppID int out with your text
It is better to explictly mention the parameternames in case the order of parameters...
August 30, 2007 at 1:47 pm
I'm interested also if that would be possible.
Only the datecreated is mentioned in the sysobjects table.
August 30, 2007 at 1:43 pm
*pro.factor isn't in the select, why do you calculate it?
*Is
'CveProyecto Prorateo' = pro.proyecto
testing if pro.proyecto is equal to the literal 'CveProyecto Prorateo'?
*
LEFT JOIN (SELECT factor = gp.factor / (SELECT...
August 30, 2007 at 1:24 pm
After the installation of Oracle Client software, reboot the server. Otherwise sql server doesn't seem to recognize until reboot.
August 30, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Hello,
I'm not familiar with ado (and its locking) but you could check the following:
*locks: sp_who2
If the function only has to enter a new record, perhaps you may consider a stored...
August 22, 2007 at 6:17 pm
You can manipulate the batchsize and querytimeout to reduce the errors.
At work I changed the standard batchsize to 100 and now the replication (on a LAN) won't time out any...
August 9, 2007 at 6:02 am
Interesting solution.
August 3, 2007 at 12:59 am
Is data_sf quite selective? If so an index on data_sf wouldn't probably hurt to avoid a tablescan for the records to update.
August 2, 2007 at 1:24 pm
1)Is there an index on data_sf?
2)if it doesn't have to run as a transaction, try splitting it up in batches
(test the following first)
DECLARE @DATEOLD datetime
DECLARE @DATENEW datetime
set @DATEOLD=...
set @DATENEW=...
SET ROWCOUNT...
August 1, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 1,216 through 1,230 (of 2,044 total)