Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 514 total)
DECLARE @Dummy INT,@PrevID INT
SELECT @PrevID = 0
DECLARE @PreDaily_D FLOAT
DECLARE @PreDaily_M FLOAT
DECLARE @PreDaily_RM FLOAT
UPDATE #ComplexFilter
SET
@PreDaily_D = CASE WHEN @PrevID = StoredCalcDataID THEN @PreDaily_D ELSE NULL END,
@PreDaily_M = CASE WHEN...
October 2, 2007 at 10:05 am
Why I like SSC.
Earlier this year, I was blessed by a company who saw through the fact that I knew almost NOTHING about SQL Server. I had...
October 2, 2007 at 9:40 am
I was able to update 11M+ rows 3x and Update every 20th row (months) 1x
in 210 seconds. I am going to see if I can get this to do...
October 2, 2007 at 8:38 am
It's going to take a little to fix the code. Should have it done a little later today. Let you know the results. Now for the other...
October 2, 2007 at 7:05 am
I love that trick you did. I tried to do that myself, but was unable to find a way to do it.
@dummy = change = sign(type1 - @previous) ,@previous...
October 2, 2007 at 6:16 am
Jeff,
The update I am doing is calculating the delta from row N-1 to row N. And storing that as an INT (1 for rising, 0 for same, -1 for...
October 1, 2007 at 9:16 pm
When I get some time tomorrow, I'll try your tests. But this goes back to the initial point of this post.
The insert is the pivot of the 1BILLION row...
October 1, 2007 at 9:13 pm
The parametered statements DON'T run faster, as mentioned the plans are cached, but that doesn't imply that they work better. However, looking at the plan it looked the same...
October 1, 2007 at 2:26 pm
You did what you could, but this is obviously a bad design.
October 1, 2007 at 1:49 pm
You have a table with 255 columns? Sounds like a design issue with the table, not the procedure.
October 1, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Jeff Gray (9/26/2007)
Another thing you might try is to use the READ UNCOMMITTED transaction isolation level. That will reduce overhead to some degree.
I have run throught about 10 runs...
October 1, 2007 at 11:34 am
Given that version should have been released somewhere in the 93-95 range.
1993 - SQL Server 4.21 for Windows NT
1995 - SQL Server 6.0, codenamed SQL95
So that puts...
October 1, 2007 at 10:43 am
Loner,
There is a kind way to say this, but this isn't it.
Life isn't fair. People who deserve the job often don't get it. Why? Because they don't...
October 1, 2007 at 10:14 am
art (9/29/2007)
So, I'm up to two T-shirts. Pretty tempting. That would be about $1,750 per shirt. But, hey, as you can see, it wouldn't be the dumbest...
October 1, 2007 at 9:33 am
Formatting in this new site is less than adequate.
I tried to post the table, but that didn't work so well.
Short answer is that Adding a PK to the process for...
October 1, 2007 at 9:09 am
Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 514 total)