January 9, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item You are a SQL Server developer who is...
October 11, 2012 at 7:58 am
nice question 🙂
_______________________________________________________________
To get quick answer follow this link:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
April 6, 2016 at 6:42 am
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.
April 6, 2016 at 7:08 am
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.
This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
April 6, 2016 at 7:12 am
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
And this functionality is no longer guaranteed to work as the ORDER BY will be ignored when using TOP 100 PERCENT.
April 6, 2016 at 7:17 am
Luis Cazares (4/6/2016)
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
And this functionality is no longer guaranteed to work as the ORDER BY will be ignored when using TOP 100 PERCENT.
Ed.. 3 1/2 year? Its from 2008, I haven't had any coffee so I can't tell you how long ago that was but I suspect it was longer than 3 1/2 years.
To Luis' point - for a presentation ORDER BY in a view (which I do sometimes just for testing) I do a TOP (1000000000000) which will not be ignored (nor does it affect the cardinality estimation when the optimizer create's a query plan).
-- Itzik Ben-Gan 2001
April 6, 2016 at 10:05 am
Alan.B (4/6/2016)
Luis Cazares (4/6/2016)
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
And this functionality is no longer guaranteed to work as the ORDER BY will be ignored when using TOP 100 PERCENT.
Ed.. 3 1/2 year? Its from 2008, I haven't had any coffee so I can't tell you how long ago that was but I suspect it was longer than 3 1/2 years.
To Luis' point - for a presentation ORDER BY in a view (which I do sometimes just for testing) I do a TOP (1000000000000) which will not be ignored (nor does it affect the cardinality estimation when the optimizer create's a query plan).
Yeah, you're right. I looked at the "more recent" comment from 2012 to determine 3 1/2 years. It's actually 8 1/4 years old. Answering 8+ year-old questions must be a hobby or something just to clutter up the "Recent Posts" page. It's kind of like spam.
April 6, 2016 at 10:07 am
The question itself even says from 2003, so... 🙂
April 6, 2016 at 10:18 am
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Alan.B (4/6/2016)
Luis Cazares (4/6/2016)
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
And this functionality is no longer guaranteed to work as the ORDER BY will be ignored when using TOP 100 PERCENT.
Ed.. 3 1/2 year? Its from 2008, I haven't had any coffee so I can't tell you how long ago that was but I suspect it was longer than 3 1/2 years.
To Luis' point - for a presentation ORDER BY in a view (which I do sometimes just for testing) I do a TOP (1000000000000) which will not be ignored (nor does it affect the cardinality estimation when the optimizer create's a query plan).
Yeah, you're right. I looked at the "more recent" comment from 2012 to determine 3 1/2 years. It's actually 8 1/4 years old. Answering 8+ year-old questions must be a hobby or something just to clutter up the "Recent Posts" page. It's kind of like spam.
Points: 6,708, Visits: 662 "bragging rights" me thinks
________________________________________________________________
you can lead a user to data....but you cannot make them think
and remember....every day is a school day
April 6, 2016 at 10:25 am
J Livingston SQL (4/6/2016)
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Alan.B (4/6/2016)
Luis Cazares (4/6/2016)
Ed Wagner (4/6/2016)
Iwas Bornready (4/6/2016)
This is great. I didn't know this simple trick.This is a QOTD that's 3 1/2 years old.
And this functionality is no longer guaranteed to work as the ORDER BY will be ignored when using TOP 100 PERCENT.
Ed.. 3 1/2 year? Its from 2008, I haven't had any coffee so I can't tell you how long ago that was but I suspect it was longer than 3 1/2 years.
To Luis' point - for a presentation ORDER BY in a view (which I do sometimes just for testing) I do a TOP (1000000000000) which will not be ignored (nor does it affect the cardinality estimation when the optimizer create's a query plan).
Yeah, you're right. I looked at the "more recent" comment from 2012 to determine 3 1/2 years. It's actually 8 1/4 years old. Answering 8+ year-old questions must be a hobby or something just to clutter up the "Recent Posts" page. It's kind of like spam.
Points: 6,708, Visits: 662 "bragging rights" me thinks
You're probably right. It's not the usual "Thanks for the question" or "Thanks for the article" but almost. At least the spam isn't as frequent as the weekend spam about watching sporting events online.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply