Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 76 total)

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    I am...might as well have it all before I run it up 🙂

    I'll send you a paper on MK models via email.

    ~Les

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    Ha! I'm glad I could send you on such an adventure 🙂

    I'll run both for time comparisons this weekend when there's not much activity on this server (this has been...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    I haven't had a chance to come up for air to review the latest, but only 8 unique triplets? I get 162...

    I did try to use the CTE in place...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    Dwain,

    Using your CTE, I've come up with a hybrid solution that shortens my initial code considerably. I'll test over the next day or so and post the findings. I also...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    You're right. It's not in my set either...No clue, other than my mind is also on PTO perhaps :ermm:

    AAR, just use the select code from SW6 to get valid sets...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    I haven't walked through the code yet, but...

    [33,51,60] - is a triple

    [55, 66] - is a double

    Triples - I only count 9 in your list. Add the above (33,51,60) and...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    Dwain,

    My apologies for the mistype on the Population. Fat fingers and all that. :blush:

    I think the only thing the CTE is not resolving correctly is those those Candidates where the...

  • RE: Aggregate Query question

    Hi Dwain,

    You're getting close.

    If you first isolate those districts from Candidates where the Old District only appears once (see SW4.doc), they can then be eliminated from the rest. There are...

  • RE: Contentious SP

    Gullimeel (7/2/2012)


    Still no luck with plan opening.I am opening it in text pad and data is kidn of scrambled.

    Gullimeel...the record locking solved it for now. Thanks again for your insight.

    Les

  • RE: Contentious SP

    Hi Chris,

    >>Just a hunch Les, but have you tried replacing the delete & update with MERGE?

    Unfortunately, I can't alter the code. The utility has been replacing in-house developed apps with...

  • RE: Contentious SP

    TheSQLGuru (7/2/2012)


    Not sure why no one recommended trace flag 1222, nor this series of blog posts: http://blogs.msdn.com/bartd/archive/2006/09/09/Deadlock-Troubleshooting_2C00_-Part-1.aspx

    I note that deadlock investigations and fixing can be a VERY...

  • RE: Contentious SP

    Pffttt...in my overwhelmed state, and attempts at trying various row locking mechanisms, I didn't add EXEC (doh!).

    I'll give it a go tomorrow after I see how this latest set...

  • RE: Contentious SP

    Gullimeel (6/30/2012)


    Related to indexes ,delete statement has the first column of the clustered index key as well as 3rd column. Thus it might be using clustered index instead of non...

  • RE: Contentious SP

    >>Please define 'chokes'. You get an error message?

    Msg 102, Level 15, State 1, Procedure UpdEPCollectorAssociation, Line 15

    Incorrect syntax near 'sp_getapplock'.

  • RE: Contentious SP

    G...

    Looks like the indexes are issues here.

    The delete statement is using clustered index but all index keys are not part of it.Thus all the rows which has dailystartdate =@startdate...

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 76 total)