Actually, I just read the EULA for SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition, and you can install multiple instances on the same computer. I think that was a change from...

Here is some code that works:

declare @DateOfBirth datetime

set @DateOfBirth = '1959-08-29 09:59:00.000'

select datediff(yy, @DateOfBirth, getdate()) - case when dateadd(yy,datediff(yy, @DateOfBirth, getdate()), @DateOfBirth) > getdate() then 1 else 0 end

set @DateOfBirth...

I want my point back too....

Here is the code as run with results:

declare @DateOfBirth datetime

set @DateOfBirth = '1959-08-29 09:59:00.000'

select DATEDIFF(yy, @DateOfBirth, GETDATE()) union all

select FLOOR(CONVERT(decimal(9, 2), DATEDIFF(d, @DateOfBirth, GETDATE())) /...

I don't have time right now to work on this, but I can give you a suggestion. When building a dynamic sql statement, build it in steps. Select...

One reason is isolation of databases. If you want to query between databases in multipke instances, you have to use linked servers or similiar query methods. On larger...

I just wish the computer would do want I want, not what I tell it to do. It would be sooo much easier.

:w00t:

O.D.A.A., Now that's a good one!

:w00t:

Should also remember that 8 years of experience does not always equate to 8 years of experience; it could be 1 year of experience 8 times.

:hehe::cool:

It also looks like you are using SQL Server 2005, so when considering indexes, also look at covered indexes using included columns. Remember there is a trade off using...

Look in BOL (Books Online) for CONTAINS.

😎

Sorry, but this doesn't quite make sense:

I need to be able to a row that contains the name of the consultant even if the main SELECT statement returns a empty...

You can put a primary key on a TVF as long as it isn't an inline TVF. We would need to see the DDL for the functions to be...

Not sure either, and with no DDL, sample data, and expected results I can't test what I have, so give this a try with no promises that it will work:

with...

You know, I didn't even notice that, but with the lack of formatting, it was easy to miss.

😎

I don't think you are going to get much better improvement. Also, it is possible a nonclustered index on [State] and [InActive:] columns may have been a better choice...