Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
No comment on the query, but have you tried changing isolation level? Read committed snapshot may solve the issue for you, with appropriate testing.
October 1, 2013 at 6:33 am
have a look at read committed snapshot isolation (RCSI), it might be what you're looking for, a bit less onerous than full snapshot isolation. Queries that run for hours sound...
October 1, 2013 at 6:20 am
The elephant in the room is the failure to meet first normal form. Being fancy with ordinals or order by case statements is beside the point.
October 1, 2013 at 6:05 am
SELECTsd.ID,
sd.string,
sd.category,
ce.experiment
FROM @SampleData sd
INNER JOIN (
SELECT category,
CASEWHEN category % 7 = 0 THEN 'A'
WHEN category % 3 = 0 THEN 'B'
ELSE 'C'
END AS experiment
FROM @SampleData
) ce
ON sd.category = ce.category
ORDER BY ce.experiment,...
September 30, 2013 at 8:51 pm
The way to think of licensing, especially if you've been through a few audits, is that licensing is paper based. Licensing is not handled by the SQL Dev team, it's...
September 8, 2013 at 8:28 pm
Sorry to dig up an old thread, but this thread was returned by Google when I was looking at getting the same information, and I have something to add to...
March 22, 2012 at 7:49 pm
As stated before, if you could get rid of the leading % it may be able to do a seek on the non-clustered index idx_nonClus_pca_work3. If you can INCLUDE the...
December 15, 2011 at 11:07 pm
remember that the ... (repeating) means repeat for infinity, so it impossible to find the value between 0.999... and 1. Unless we use another notation, does 0.000...1 + 0.999... =...
June 7, 2011 at 11:40 pm
robert.williams 82816 (6/7/2011)
1.111... is also equal to 1.
No, because 1.01 and 1.011 and 1.001 (you get the idea) can be placed between 1.111... and 1
June 7, 2011 at 11:23 pm
Barry Mazur explains the concept of why 0.999... = 1 in his book Imagining Numbers: (particularly the square root of minus fifteen). If you had to place 0.999... and 1...
June 7, 2011 at 10:39 pm
A page count of 48 is too small to worry about. From my own testing small indexes don't appear to defragment that well, or it could be that with small...
June 6, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Rebuilding a unique clustered index: This is the same as SQL Server 2000 - the cluster keys aren't changing and so the non-clustered indexes are not rebuilt.
Rebuilding a non-unique clustered...
June 6, 2011 at 2:31 am
Also try running dm_db_index_physical_stats with the detailed mode, it takes longer but is a more accurate way of verifying your reindex script.
sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DEFAULT, NULL, NULL, NULL, 'DETAILED')
To agree and expand...
June 6, 2011 at 1:38 am
Hi devin,
I wouldn't script out sa, it's the only account I wouldn't script out, only because I've never tried it. Regarding the AD accounts, I would script them out and...
May 19, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)