August 14, 2018 at 12:34 pm
Sean Lange - Tuesday, August 14, 2018 12:23 PMPerhaps I should have stated that in American English (at least as I know it) those two words have the same distinction. To say that I have not heard anybody completely butcher phrasing (or done it myself) would a complete fallacy. 🙂
That is interesting. I often hear US people saying something like "let's evaluate alternate solutions".
Clearly it is not some sort of solution1, solution2, solution1, solution2 idea being evaluated.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
- Martin Rees
The absence of consumable DDL, sample data and desired results is, however, evidence of the absence of my response
- Phil Parkin
August 14, 2018 at 12:49 pm
Phil Parkin - Tuesday, August 14, 2018 12:34 PMThat is interesting. I often hear US people saying something like "let's evaluate alternate solutions".Clearly it is not some sort of solution1, solution2, solution1, solution2 idea being evaluated.
Quite correct, Phil. That's management-speak for "let's bury this in bureaucracy and hope the problem goes away on its own" and I've heard it far too frequently. 😉
August 14, 2018 at 1:59 pm
And this is why I drink....
Four months ago I told my boss that I need to tune some queries in a datamart because they were using massive CTEs and the stored procedures took far longer than they should. But because it ran weekly when the servers weren't busy he didn't want me to spend the time on it.
Two weeks ago he said that temp tables perform better than CTEs and I should convert them to temp tables. I'd only been telling him this for months and was sadly dismayed I had to tell him at all.
But here's the kicker.
"Change them to temp tables so it runs faster. But don't bother performance tuning it."
:blink:
August 14, 2018 at 2:54 pm
JustMarie - Tuesday, August 14, 2018 1:59 PMAnd this is why I drink....Four months ago I told my boss that I need to tune some queries in a datamart because they were using massive CTEs and the stored procedures took far longer than they should. But because it ran weekly when the servers weren't busy he didn't want me to spend the time on it.
Two weeks ago he said that temp tables perform better than CTEs and I should convert them to temp tables. I'd only been telling him this for months and was sadly dismayed I had to tell him at all.
But here's the kicker.
"Change them to temp tables so it runs faster. But don't bother performance tuning it."
:blink:
Make it faster but don't test it...got it. :crazy:
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
August 15, 2018 at 3:08 am
JustMarie - Tuesday, August 14, 2018 1:59 PMAnd this is why I drink....Four months ago I told my boss that I need to tune some queries in a datamart because they were using massive CTEs and the stored procedures took far longer than they should. But because it ran weekly when the servers weren't busy he didn't want me to spend the time on it.
Two weeks ago he said that temp tables perform better than CTEs and I should convert them to temp tables. I'd only been telling him this for months and was sadly dismayed I had to tell him at all.
But here's the kicker.
"Change them to temp tables so it runs faster. But don't bother performance tuning it."
:blink:
Your boss is a post turtle.
For fast, accurate and documented assistance in answering your questions, please read this article.
Understanding and using APPLY, (I) and (II) Paul White
Hidden RBAR: Triangular Joins / The "Numbers" or "Tally" Table: What it is and how it replaces a loop Jeff Moden
August 16, 2018 at 5:07 am
Thom A - Monday, August 13, 2018 9:47 AMIs it just me, or is anyone else not receiving topic/forum subscription emails today? (I've not had any email since Sunday Afternoon).
Sometimes some of the transatlantic routes temorarily stop working or get jammed with too much traffic. That could be what caused your problem. Or it could be a glitch in your ISP's service. Or a glitch at sqlcervercentral.com.
There were 5 messages posted in this thread on Sunday, I received 1 on Sunday and the remaining 4 on Monday although I checked my email at midnight on Sunday. so there was a glitch of some sort somewhere.
Tom
August 16, 2018 at 6:38 am
JustMarie - Tuesday, August 14, 2018 1:59 PMAnd this is why I drink....Four months ago I told my boss that I need to tune some queries in a datamart because they were using massive CTEs and the stored procedures took far longer than they should. But because it ran weekly when the servers weren't busy he didn't want me to spend the time on it.
Two weeks ago he said that temp tables perform better than CTEs and I should convert them to temp tables. I'd only been telling him this for months and was sadly dismayed I had to tell him at all.
But here's the kicker.
"Change them to temp tables so it runs faster. But don't bother performance tuning it."
:blink:
Heh.... this is also likely the reason why you don't drink with your boss! 😀
It's amazing that he flopped from one idea to the other and made a bad decision on both. You and most everyone on this thread know that, while the amazing "Divide'n'Conquer" methods that do use Temp Tables are frequently the answer, "It Depends". It sounds now like your boss is stuck thinking that Temp Tables are always faster than CTEs and we both know that nothing could be further than the truth.
I'm not sure why bosses and even some Developers and DBAs look at a technique that worked in one spot as a panacea for every problem. It reminds me of when Cursors, rCTEs, CLRs, Functions, and PowerShell (to name a few of the more obvious things) first came out. "Everyone" started using it (whatever was the new shinny object of the day) for everything, sometimes to great detriment to performance and resource usage.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 16, 2018 at 6:56 am
Jeff Moden - Thursday, August 16, 2018 6:38 AMHeh.... this is also likely the reason why you don't drink with your boss! 😀
It's amazing that he flopped from one idea to the other and made a bad decision on both. You and most everyone on this thread know that, while the amazing "Divide'n'Conquer" methods that do use Temp Tables are frequently the answer, "It Depends". It sounds now like your boss is stuck thinking that Temp Tables are always faster than CTEs and we both know that nothing could be further than the truth.
I'm not sure why bosses and even some Developers and DBAs look at a technique that worked in one spot as a panacea for every problem. It reminds me of when Cursors, rCTEs, CLRs, Functions, and PowerShell (to name a few of the more obvious things) first came out. "Everyone" started using it (whatever was the new shinny object of the day) for everything, sometimes to great detriment to performance and resource usage.
Come on, Jeff. They were the new and shiny thing, so they must be better than what we have, right? Take FORMAT, for example. It'll do all your formatting for you instead of using the old CONVERT function. Pay no attention to performance - it's new! 😉
August 16, 2018 at 6:59 am
Jeff Moden - Thursday, August 16, 2018 6:38 AMI'm not sure why bosses and even some Developers and DBAs look at a technique that worked in one spot as a panacea for every problem. It reminds me of when Cursors, rCTEs, CLRs, Functions, and PowerShell (to name a few of the more obvious things) first came out. "Everyone" started using it (whatever was the new shinny object of the day) for everything, sometimes to great detriment to performance and resource usage.
Really? Not sure?
Because it was stated in the latest press-release from Microsoft, and confirmed by an article from a MS MVP in the latest issue of a magazine.
The guys who make the product cannot be wrong - right?
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
August 16, 2018 at 7:11 am
Sergiy - Thursday, August 16, 2018 6:59 AMReally? Not sure?
Because it was stated in the latest press-release from Microsoft, and confirmed by an article from a MS MVP in the latest issue of a magazine.
The guys who make the product cannot be wrong - right?
People at Microsoft must know how to do things perfectly. Otherwise, they wouldn't have one of the largest software companies in the world.
August 16, 2018 at 7:17 am
Luis Cazares - Thursday, August 16, 2018 7:11 AMPeople at Microsoft must know how to do things perfectly. Otherwise, they wouldn't have one of the largest software companies in the world.
Name me 1 thing which Microsoft done perfectly.
They sell things perfectly, but it does not mean those things are done right.
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
August 16, 2018 at 7:32 am
Luis Cazares - Thursday, August 16, 2018 7:11 AMPeople at Microsoft must know how to do things perfectly. Otherwise, they wouldn't have one of the largest software companies in the world.
Oh... Is that why the documentation for CASE can't make up it's mind on if it's a CASE expression or CASE statement... Because it's so perfect, it most be both or either at the same time...
Thom~
Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.
Larnu.uk
August 16, 2018 at 7:33 am
Sergiy - Thursday, August 16, 2018 7:17 AMLuis Cazares - Thursday, August 16, 2018 7:11 AMPeople at Microsoft must know how to do things perfectly. Otherwise, they wouldn't have one of the largest software companies in the world.Name me 1 thing which Microsoft done perfectly.
They sell things perfectly, but it does not mean those things are done right.
They perfectly insert random bugs in their products. :hehe:
August 16, 2018 at 8:04 am
Phil Parkin - Monday, August 13, 2018 10:18 AM
- Program instead of Programme
- Dialog instead of Dialogue
- Oriented instead of Orientated
- Alternate instead of Alternative
- Matrixes instead of Matrices
But I'll never accept the execrable 'aluminum' ... And 'herb' will always have an aspirated 'h' :hehe:
As for indexes and indices, according to OED both are valid plurals, and there are some contexts in which "indexes" is normal usage: when a TOC in the form of section summaries with an indication of there position and length in the book is called an index the plural is indexes; similarly when an index is an alphabetical list; when a book has an index of place names (or or personal names, or of words, or of subjects, or of some combination of these) listing the places in the book where each occurrs the plural is indexes ; when an index is a list of things containing keys or attributes of things in some space which indicate where in that space the things refereced occur the plural is indexes. So in British English, indexes is the normal usage in the context of indexes in a database, and indices would be regarded as odd, while indices is the normal plural in mathematics and in other areas of computing and in optics, craniometry, crystallography, synamics, and economics. In other fields, maybe indices is a bit more common than indexes, but perhaps not - it's more common across the combination of all areas of of the language not mentioned above, but perhaps not in the language used in each individual one of those areas. And of course Merriam-Webster states that both indexes and indicies are both valid plurals of index, so indices is good American English in at least some contexts.
I'm not much bothered by Aluminum (having had to cope with names of elements in several languages over the years) but am irritated by the many Americans who have lost track of the alternative/alternate distinction, which according to Merriam-Webster is still there in American English so that "alternate" usually means the same in both AmE and BrE. I think orientate is becoming less and less common in BrE (althouhgh orientation isn't), and I don't recall anyone using the word matrices during my three years studying maths at OU, back in the 60s, so orient and matrixes both seem normal to me. Losing the "me" and "ue" from the other two words doesn't affect the sound, so I can't see anything wrong with that.
Tom
August 16, 2018 at 8:18 am
TomThomson - Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:04 AMAs for indexes and indices, according to OED both are valid plurals, and there are some contexts in which "indexes" is normal usage: when a TOC in the form of section summaries with an indication of there position and length in the book is called an index the plural is indexes; similarly when an index is an alphabetical list; when a book has an index of place names (or or personal names, or of words, or of subjects, or of some combination of these) listing the places in the book where each occurrs the plural is indexes ; when an index is a list of things containing keys or attributes of things in some space which indicate where in that space the things refereced occur the plural is indexes. So in British English, indexes is the normal usage in the context of indexes in a database, and indices would be regarded as odd, while indices is the normal plural in mathematics and in other areas of computing and in optics, craniometry, crystallography, synamics, and economics. In other fields, maybe indices is a bit more common than indexes, but perhaps not - it's more common across the combination of all areas of of the language not mentioned above, but perhaps not in the language used in each individual one of those areas. And of course Merriam-Webster states that both indexes and indicies are both valid plurals of index, so indices is good American English in at least some contexts.I'm not much bothered by Aluminum (having had to cope with names of elements in several languages over the years) but am irritated by the many Americans who have lost track of the alternative/alternate distinction, which according to Merriam-Webster is still there in American English so that "alternate" usually means the same in both AmE and BrE. I think orientate is becoming less and less common in BrE (althouhgh orientation isn't), and I don't recall anyone using the word matrices during my three years studying maths at OU, back in the 60s, so orient and matrixes both seem normal to me. Losing the "me" and "ue" from the other two words doesn't affect the sound, so I can't see anything wrong with that.
In "Lives Of A Cell", Lewis Thomas postulates that Language is really what the human race is working to build and pass on together, similar to termite mounds, where each human/termite only sees their part of the overall plan, yet vast structures are created that link together in different ways. It seems robustly apparent that despite any "rules" for language, it is definitely a shared experience and fluid concept, with common usage often overriding any scholarly application and many times eventually overtaking the meaning or use of a turn of phrase.
Interesting idea that grabbed me and I haven't been able to let go of since I read it. Questionable biology, but fun reading!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please follow Best Practices For Posting On Forums to receive quicker and higher quality responses
Viewing 15 posts - 61,996 through 62,010 (of 66,710 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply