Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 48 total)
Yes that did correct the problem of teh syntax error. But after letting it run for 3+ hours I ended up canceling it.
Still trying to determine hoe to create a...
July 30, 2008 at 6:38 am
I tried your new query.
Got an error on line 20 saying:
Invalid column name 'X_AREA2'
July 29, 2008 at 9:40 am
We rebuild all indexes every night and also update statsistics with full scan every night.
I tried creating two individual views with schemabinding so I could add indexes on the views,...
July 29, 2008 at 7:51 am
SS,
Yes I did that already, made a query like you said. I should have given a list of indexes that are already present. But yes, that index was already there.
One...
July 28, 2008 at 2:44 pm
GSquared, SSCrazy,
There is no need for me to carry this Post any further. The reason for this is because your last suggestion was the solution I was looking for.
For...
June 30, 2008 at 5:39 am
I understand completely. I will put together data for all 3 tables that you can load and give you what the results should be. This should make it a lot...
June 23, 2008 at 8:21 am
I tried that and it still returns nothing.
The param table always has a single row. It contains the number to match with of which rows to return. Each time a...
June 21, 2008 at 5:09 am
Because my Sort order is Binary, I need to capitalize everything as follows:
;with Main (CONTACT_WID, SOURCE_WID, OFFER_WID) as
(select Chf.CONTACT_WID, Chf.SOURCE_WID,
...
June 20, 2008 at 5:48 am
No I am sorry to report that your modification is a lot worse. It is suppose to return 150 rows, this new modified query return 1.7 million rows and the...
June 18, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Your query is very fast and I noticed it is SQL Server 2005 only. That is okay, I don't have SQL Server 2000 any more.
I have attached the execution plans...
June 17, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I apologize, please disregard my last post. I need to load "new" records into our OLTP database and run an ETL job to pull the new records into our OLAP...
June 17, 2008 at 9:20 am
Let me first say I am impressed with the timing of this query, it runs in 21 seconds. But unfortunately, it returns nothing.
I appreciate your effort on this.
June 17, 2008 at 8:55 am
After removing the second word "JOIN" this query runs in 5 seconds and returns teh value 92377906
June 17, 2008 at 4:43 am
The original query that runs in 51 minutes is:
SELECT
CHF.CONTACT_WID , COUNT(DISTINCT CHF.SOURCE_WID) , COUNT(DISTINCT CASE WHEN POH.OFFER_WID IS NULL THEN 0 ELSE POH.OFFER_WID...
June 16, 2008 at 11:24 am
Yes Gus, this does return teh 1.8 million rows that is expected. Unfortunately it takes 21 minutes longer than the original.
A sample of the output is provided below:
5184773046
1880734317
192276711
5582125457
96377744
1794433418
11038294572
10483231119
17512101020
1751216382
Again, this...
June 16, 2008 at 11:22 am
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 48 total)