Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 851 total)
Gaby Abed (5/13/2009)
Basically, if you are a heavy gamer, consider it.
[font="Verdana"]Damn. You mean my operating system is going to watch my weight now?[/font]
May 14, 2009 at 10:40 pm
[font="Verdana"]Still working through.
The issue is where a reversal exists to which there is no outage (surprisingly, they do happen.) In this case, both approaches fail. I can make...
May 14, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Jeff Moden (5/14/2009)
Got it and mostly agree especially since CHECKSUM is not a guarantee that something has changed or not.
[font="Verdana"]We were actually using BINARY_CHECKSUM(), but it has the same issues.
HashBytes...
May 14, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Jeff Moden (5/14/2009)
May 14, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Bruce W Cassidy (5/14/2009)
Carl Federl (5/14/2009)
Not sure if this solution meets all of the requirements but it sjhould be close.
[font="Verdana"]It seems to give identical results. Thanks -- it looks...
May 14, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Carl Federl (5/14/2009)
Not sure if this solution meets all of the requirements but it sjhould be close.
[font="Verdana"]It seems to give identical results. Thanks -- it looks like that might...
May 14, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Jeff Moden (5/14/2009)
The performance on a persisted calculated column is "sucky"?
[font="Verdana"]Yup. You persist it by creating an index over it, right? So when you do a bulk set...
May 14, 2009 at 7:20 pm
[font="Verdana"]Why not just create a report in SQL Server Reporting Services? From there, people can subscribe to the report, you can schedule it to run automatically once a month,...
May 14, 2009 at 7:11 pm
[font="Verdana"]If a value can change... it's not a constant.
Stick it in a table. Cache the table. You can use tricks like local caches stored in compact edition...
May 14, 2009 at 7:08 pm
[font="Verdana"]A persisted value can help. However, from experience... don't bother -- the performance is too sucky. You're better off just comparing all of the individual columns. ...
May 14, 2009 at 7:03 pm
RBarryYoung (5/6/2009)
Ah well, that's not too bad then. I mean he could have called me carbuncular, that's not too good. 😛
[font="Verdana"]Wait! Oracular![/font]
May 6, 2009 at 8:37 pm
[font="Verdana"]That reminds me of my FoxPlus days...
FoxPlus was an interpreted version of dBase, but ran somewhat faster. On an 8088 system, it still wasn't fast enough. So what...
May 6, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Lynn Pettis (5/6/2009)
And with that, Bruce, you can also remove the TOP 1 as shown.
[font="Verdana"]Yep, you're right, the top 1 is no longer necessary. No Flo, you're not slow......
May 6, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Florian Reischl (5/6/2009)
Hi BruceThis works correct, but why access the table twice?
[font="Verdana"]Ooops. My Oracle days are showing... keep forgetting that you can do a select without having a...
May 6, 2009 at 4:40 pm
[font="Verdana"]I think Lynn has the right approach in doing the check and the insert in one statement, but he's not quite got the syntax right. Here's a quick test...
May 6, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 851 total)