Viewing 15 posts - 2,926 through 2,940 (of 8,416 total)
Flo,
The Quirky Update method is a valid approach here, but you cannot use a JOIN!
Also MAXDOP 1 must be specified to avoid parallelism.
Using your example table, I would write the...
July 17, 2010 at 9:31 pm
hxkresl (7/17/2010)
July 17, 2010 at 8:24 pm
Sankar Reddy (7/17/2010)
You could use sys.sp_cdc_change_job to specify the retention time.
Ah! That was it - sys.sp_cdc_change_job - I didn't have a CDC instance to hand to test so thanks...
July 17, 2010 at 7:47 pm
8kb (7/17/2010)
July 17, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Stupid question. This post gives me one point back.
July 17, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Stupid question. This post gives me one point back.
July 17, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Stupid question. This post gives me one point back.
July 17, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Tara-1044200 (7/17/2010)
July 17, 2010 at 11:51 am
Jim mentioned XML indexes earlier.
My contribution is: full-text indexes.
July 17, 2010 at 11:43 am
SELECT name FROM Table1 GROUP BY name;
or, equivalently...
SELECT DISTINCT name FROM Table1;
July 17, 2010 at 11:39 am
Well that's just weird. I just posted on one of the 2-year-old threads referenced in this article earlier this morning, before I saw that this article had been republished....
July 17, 2010 at 11:28 am
CirquedeSQLeil (7/17/2010)
Tom.Thomson (7/17/2010)
Alvin Ramard (7/17/2010)
Steve Jones - Editor (7/17/2010)
I'm rubber and you all are glue....And we'll soon find out that it's true ...
But I'll stretch and sick to you
Hence, your...
July 17, 2010 at 11:22 am
Sankar Reddy (7/17/2010)
[font="Courier New"]As far as I know, the custom deletion of data is NOT based on date interval, rather its LSN based and the SP to use is sys.sp_cdc_cleanup_change_table.[/font]
Isn't...
July 17, 2010 at 11:21 am
Steve Jones - Editor (7/17/2010)
July 17, 2010 at 10:51 am
Steve Jones - Editor (7/17/2010)
July 17, 2010 at 10:15 am
Viewing 15 posts - 2,926 through 2,940 (of 8,416 total)