Search results for query: *

Hi all, I was wondering if I may bounce a couple ideas off ya'll, I have a project that I am going to implement shortly but before I continue I wanted to know if there would be a more effecate method of storing a retrieving data. The basic thought is: I need to be able to provide a question...

MrDenny,SQLBill, Well... I have to painfully confirm that what SQLBill stated is indeed true. I tested this scenario at home over the weekend. I create a new instance of SQL server on a mid grade server (because I didn't have a SAN at home I had to improvise...) I had an external USB HDD that I...

Hi MrDenny, Because how frequent the tempdb is using RAID 5 posed a fairly large performance hit. Granted it does give my space back... but with a hitch. Ok, so SQL server will not function if the tempdb becomes suspect is offline in the middle of a transaction? do you happen to know if SQL...

Hello This might be an odd question but... does anyone know if SQL server will crash or mark production database suspect if tempdb goes down? Ok, well here is my issue I have an issue with space on a SAN box. The EDW applications use the tempdb ALOT!! Issue here is we are running out of space...

Ok that makes since but, the odd thing here is the clustered index doesn't contain the column that the SARG range is being applied to. Yet it still uses it. Is the clustered index looked at first when determining if the range can but scanned within the clustered index before using the...

Well, I did find some time to rebuild those indexes and updated the stats. Oddly the plan has not changed it’s tune… once more, what’s even more weird is I have a clustered index on the fact table and I just noticed that when I do define a SARG value to the date range it attempts to use the...

Yeah, I saw that after I posted it... yuk!! I will have to wait until this weekend to rebuild those indexes... loads are done nightly and usually inserts around 2 5 million record a night. So I need to be able to perform so index maintenance some time after loads but prior to users accessing the...

From what I have read SQL 2000 can support partitioning, currently we are in an EDW architecture, load times are unreal , I think I have squeezed every bit of performance I m gonna get out of it. Not to mention we are going to be a move to a new SAN which will obviously bump up performance...

Oh... Geez sorry I almost forgot... Thank you MrDenny, it's MVP's like you and CatAdmin that make us lesser mortals better. Thanks TalenX

Catadmin, That sounds perfect! Once again thank you for ALL of your insight! *** CATADMIN *** Thanks Again TalenX

Thats the odd thing... everything looking good. here are the stats: DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS Statistics for FACT INDEX Updated Rows Rows Sampled Steps Density Average key length -------------------- --------------------...

Ahh… I see. I think I’m going to have to concur with you ... it’s seem once a function is applied with some time of conversion the index becomes invalid to the optimizer. I wonder if there is any way to force the optimizer to use the index... I have attempted to use an index hint... But with no...

Do you happen to know where you found that documentation... that may be the issue here. Thanks TalenX

Is it just me or does the BOL not make since as to why this is what it is... is Microsoft expecting you to store dimensional data in you fact tables??? That can't be right... (Other wise what’s the point of partitioning your data if you can take advantage of the whole purposes of the...

Fantastic!! Basically I am creating a some what template for our users (we create numerous db per client and need a standard.) I was just wondering if I needed to take column order storage in to consideration. Thanks Talenx

I double checked the columns that are being used in the join and where clauses and they are compliant. We run pretty much all of our joining object off a segregate integer based key. Very odd!! Even when I use an index hint the optimizer still performs a fact table scan. hmm...

Yep! It’s almost as if the optimizer completely ignores the index when ANY function is applied to a data object... can that be right? Even if I cast or convert the data object to the proper data type (date time, in this case) the optimizer still ignores it.

Walid, unfortunately where this SQL is being used it can not use a variable. I know.. I know that sucks... gotta love working with third party software that only supports ansi 92 code. vongrunt, ya, sorry bout that... :) You know the odd thing is if you were to try the code with getdate() the...

Will do.. BTW thank you for the insite. your input has been very usefully. :-)

Oh, sorry I just used that conversion to show that the dateadd function invalidates the index ... at least in the optimizers eyes.. If you want you can use the following: select dateadd(d, -1, cast(cast(month(getdate()) as varchar)+'/01/'+cast(year(getdate()) as varchar) as datetime))