The destination table is truncated and indexes are dropped before loading and after data being inserted we re-create the indexes.
Before this, a view extracts data from more than 22 tables from a staging database and tries to insert this data in the destination table.
it used to take 12-15 mins, but since yesterday loading one particular table never completes. While loading, the database is set to Simple recovery. There are no blocking. It's part of a daily batch thats loads 6 GB of data everyday. But while loading on particular table it's just keep running for hours. I tried rebuilding the indexes and re-starting the SQL Server but of no use.
Any help is much appreciated as this production batch job.
There are two applications running on different server say ServerA and ServerB. Both applications are using same database server SQL Server 2005 say ServerB. Called the application as ApplicationA and ApplicationB with respect to Server names
It means for ServerA the database is remote and for ServerB, database is local.
Both the applications are Java application and using datasource to connect to the database. The driver used are SQL Server 2000 driver (which includes 3 jars). This can be a question that why 2000 driver is used for 2005. The reason is, application on ServerA is getting error while using SQL Server 2005 as Driver not proper.
Problem Area:
When ApplicationB (local to database) is doing some DB operations (which includes select and then batch insert), ApplicationA (remote) is trying to insert a record which is taking too long time (around 40 sec.). This is causing timed out in ApplicationA.
ApplicationA is inserting the data into the same table from where ApplicationB is selecting the data.
I have a query which returns approximately 50000 records, I am using a linked server to connect to two databases and retrieve data. For some reason it is taking a liitle more than hour to execute the query, but on MS Sql Server query window it comes after few minutes but the query runs for a long time.
How can expediate my query execution process.
Environment details
Database: MS Sql Server 64bit 2005 MS Sql jar file: sqljdbc_1.2.jar OS: Windows both server and client.
I'm running a query (see below) on my development server and its taking around 45 seconds. It hosts 18 user databases ranging from 3 MB to 400 MB. The production server, which is very similar but with only 1 25 MB user database, runs the query in less than 1 second. Both servers have been running on VMWare for almost 1 year with no problems. However last week I applied SP 2 to the development server, and yesterday I applied Critical Update KB934458. The production server is still running SQL Server 2005 Standard SP 1. Other than that, both servers are identical and running Windows 2003 Server Standard SP 1. I'm not seeing this discrepancy with other queries running against user databases.
use MyDatabase
GO
select db_name(database_id) as 'Database', o.name as 'Table',
s.index_id, index_type_desc, alloc_unit_type_desc, index_level, i.name as 'Index Name',
Sometime is necessary to stop MSSQLSeverOLAPServieces to do a full backup in my OLAP Server disks. After backup had finished and I tried to star MSSQLSeverOLAPServieces but it takes almost 30 minutes to the services starts. What can it be causing that?
I have a stored procedure that normally takes about 5 hours to complete: DELETE tblX WHERE PROC_DT < dateadd(day, -93 , getdate())
tblX has about 55 million records and has an index on PROC_DT.
I have this running as a scheduled task. Over the weekend, the task executed and it is still running 56+ hours later. Does anybody have any ideas as to where I should look for the problem? I am afraid to kill the process because of the rollback time.
Hi, I have a table with 48 million rows,when i executed following update query it is taking 10 HOURS in SQL SERVER 2000 with SP1. Where as when i executed same query in SQL SERVER7.0 with same table then it is taking 13 MINUTES. Comming to Machine...SQL 2000 Server has more processors and greater memory than SQL 7.0 m/c. It looks strange but this is true.Does any one faced such problem..is there any bug in SQL 2000?????
Here is Query::
update cus_pay_jan_dist set univ_regdate = b.dayid from cus_pay_jan_dist a with (nolock), tm_dayids b with (nolock) where a.univ_regdate = b.dayidnum and a.univ_regdate like '2001%'
I have an update statment in my SSIS that use to take 10 minutes in SQL 2000 dts and now its take 1 hour 15 minutes in SQL 2005.
this is my sql update statment - Update WeeklySalesHistory set weekendingdate = (SELECT LastTransDateTime from ReplicationControl where TableName = 'WEEKHST') where weekendingdate is null
It is using ole db connection. About 36,000 records that it is updating.
I have read ole db can be slow and to use staging table. Does that mean on all updates like this I have to use a staging table and then insert. I didn't use to have to do this in SQL 2000. Has it changed. Are there any other options?
I'm trying to figure out why my transaction log backup is taking up to an hour to complete. I started off with a full recovery model with a Full database back up every Sunday, differential backups every Tuesday/Thursday and log backups every 5 minutes. I would have thought that the log file backups would execute much quicker because I'm backing them up more often.
Here is my backup statement, I'm hoping I've got a wrong option that you can point out to me:
BACKUP LOG [xxxx] TO [LogFilexxxxBackups] WITH NOINIT , NOUNLOAD , NAME = N'xxxx log backup', SKIP , STATS = 10, NOFORMAT
Good afternoon everyone, I have written a view that pulls customer demographic infomration as well as pulling data from multiple scalar-valued functions. I am using this view to pull and send data from one database to another in the same SQL server. The problem that I am having is that I am running this import as a scheduled job in windows. The job is taking almost 24 hours to complete this task. The total number of records that are being pulled is around 21,000+. I have tried removing the functions from the view and it only takes the view 20 seconds to pull the demographic information from the same 21,000+ records but when I add the function calls this is where the time to complete goes through the roof. Has anyone encountered this before if so what would you suggest doing? Any help would be appreciated. Here is the syntax for my view: SELECT TOP 100 PERCENT CUS_EMAIL AS Email, CUS_CUSTNUM AS MemberID, CUS_PREFIX AS Prefix, CUS_FNAME AS FirstName, CUS_LNAME AS LastName, CUS_SUFFIX AS Suffix, CUS_TITLE AS Title, CUS_STATE AS State, CUS_COUNTRY AS Country, CUS_ZIP AS ZipCode, CUS_SEX AS Gender, CAST(CUS_DEMCODEA AS nvarchar(20)) + ',' + CAST(CUS_DEMCODEB AS nvarchar(20)) + ',' + CAST(CUS_DEMCODEC AS nvarchar(20)) + ',' + CAST(CUS_DEMCODED AS nvarchar(20)) AS DemoCodes, dbo.GetSubScribedDateMLA(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLASubscribedDate, dbo.GetSubScribedDateMLP(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLPSubscribedDate, dbo.GetSubScribedDateLDC(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS LDCSubscribedDate, dbo.GetMLAExpiration(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLASubExpireDate, dbo.GetMLPExpiration(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLPSubExpireDate, dbo.GetLDCExpiration(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS LDCSubExpireDate, dbo.IsProspect(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS AGMProspect, dbo.IsCurrentCustomer(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS AGMCurrentCustomer, dbo.IsMLAMember(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLAMember, dbo.IsMLPMember(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS MLPMember, dbo.IsLDCMember(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS LDCMember, dbo.CalculateTotalRevenue(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS AGMTotalRevenue, dbo.GetPubCodes(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL) AS ProductsPurchased, dbo.GetEmailType(CUS_CUSTNUM, CUS_EMAIL, CUS_RENT_EMAIL) AS EmailType, CUS_COMPANY AS Company, CUS_CITY AS City FROM dbo.CUS WHERE (CUS_EMAIL IS NOT NULL) AND (CUS_EMAIL <> '') AND (CUS_EMAIL_VALID = 'Y') AND (CUS_EMAIL LIKE '%@%.%') AND (CUS_RENT_EMAIL = 'Y' OR CUS_RENT_EMAIL = 'R' OR CUS_RENT_EMAIL = 'I') AND (CHARINDEX(' ', CUS_EMAIL) = 0) AND (CUS_EMAIL NOT LIKE '@%') Thanks in advance Michael Reyeros
I have a backup mainentance plan that does a full backup daily at 03:00am and then 2 minute transaction log backups throughout the day to a raided hard drive (It is set to overwrite after 2 weeks), When i go into enterprise manager and select the database to restore it just seems to take too long to read the backup history in. Can this time be reduced as i need to be able to restore the database A.S.A.P but still need a point in time restore to within 2 minutes of going down??
I have SSIS Projects taking a long time to open with packages with a large number of data flows. Is there a way to turn off validation of metadata when a package opens? Turn off validation during execution on SSIS Service (after previously validated in dev)? Or be able to control when validation takes place in general?
In my one package (1 of 5) I have 43 data flows (with a single source to target mapping) in 4 sequence containers, and it takes approximately 2-3 seconds per source to target mapping and sequence container to validate which will translate to 1 ½ to 2 ½ minutes to open. When the project with all 100+ tables for the data warehouse goes through validation, I can make coffee in the time it takes to open the project. I have to delete *.suo file (or verify all packages are closed in the designer and save the project file), and when I open the project, I have to jump immediately to SSISÃ Work Offline to set it to not validate the metadata to be able to work in a timely fashion. DelayValidation=TRUE does not help much.
Running in debug mode, has an effect of causing packages that were not open and validated to go through validation though I am not running those packages. Validate once during design and run forever.
Even if I re-open a package that I just closed from designer and had gone through validation, it will go through the validation process again.
It would be great if there could be an on-demand option off the menu bar to allow one to control when validation can take place for a project, or a more granular validation option for a specific data flow or container.
Why is taking so long to open/create/render the reports for the first time? Is there any configuration to change this? I don€™t think this behavior is related to Report Execution or cache! I think there is something else going on! Thanks.
I am using VS2005 (VB) to develop a PPC WM5.0 Program. And I am using SQLCE 3.0. My PPC Hardware is in 400MHz.
The question is when the program try to insert the first record into sdf database after each time the program started. It takes a long time. Does anyone know why and how can I fix it?
I will load the whole database into a dataset when the program start and do all the "Insert", "Update", "Delete" in this dataset and fill it into database after each action.
cn.Open() sda = New SqlCeDataAdapter(SQL, cn) 'SQL = Select * From Table scb = New SqlCeCommandBuilder(sda) sda.Update(dataset) cn.Close()
I check the sda.update(), it takes about 0.08s for filling one record into database normally. But:
1. Start the PPC Program
2. Load DB into dataset
3. Create a ONE new record in dataset
4. Fill back to DB
When I take this four steps everytime, the filling time is almost 1s or even more!
Actually, 0.08s is just a normal case. Sometimes, it still takes over 1s to filling back a dataset which only inserted one record when the program is running. (Even all inserted records are exactly the same in data jsut different in the integer key)
However, when I give up the dataset and using the following code:
cn.Open() Dim cmd As New SqlCeCommand(SQL, cn) ' I have build the insert SQL before (Insert Into Table values(XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX All field)
I found that it is still the same that the first inserted record takes more time, but just about 0.2s. And the normal insert time is around 0.02s. It is 4 times faster!!!
Here is the situation, please let me know if you have any tips:..TXT files in a share at \fooSPROCS run daily parses of many things, including data on that share. Theother day, we encountered rows in the TXT files which looked like:column1Row1data,column2Row1datacolumn1Row2data,column2Row2data...etc..However, column2 was about 6000 bytes of unicode. We are bulk insertinginto a table specifying nvarchar(4000). When it encounters high unicoderows, it throws a truncation error (16).We really need information contained in the first 200 bytes of the string incolumn2. However, the errors are causing the calling SPROC to abort.Please let me know if you have any suggestions on workarounds for thissituation. Ideally, we would only Bulk Insert a sub-section of column2 ifpossible.Thanks!/Ty
I have two versions of "rsk.txt" one with 1.9mill rows and one with the first 2000 rows only. The files have one column only with 115 characters that I'll split in to several columns later using SUBSTRING. The one with 2000 rows fires in to the database with no problems whatsoever using this exact code, the other one throws the following error:
Server: Msg 4866, Level 17, State 66, Line 1 Bulk Insert fails. Column is too long in the data file for row 1, column 1. Make sure the field terminator and row terminator are specified correctly.
How can I resolve this problem?
EDIT: I tried several different row- and fieldterminators but this exact one works for the small data-file so I assume it should also work for the large one...the large one is however copyed directly using binary ftp from a unix-filesystem and the small one is manually copied into a new txt-file using UltraEdit.
I'm having a problem doing a bulk insert on a tab delimited text file into mssql 2005 using either bulk insert or bcp. When using the following bulk insert command I get the "The column is too long in the data file for row 1, column 2" error. I have tried
The data file only has data for the first 10 columns of a table with over 100 columns.
First 10 table columns have the format of CREATE TABLE [dbo].[CustomerDefinition]( [Rowid] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT FOR REPLICATION NOT NULL, [CustomerId] [varchar](15) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL, [Name] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [Addr1] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [Addr2] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [Addr3] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [City] [varchar](30) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [State] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [Zipcode] [varchar](10) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [Country] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL CONSTRAINT [PK_CustomerDefinition] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
The data-file looks like this (it is tab delimited):
1 1 BEN ONE BENVENUTO 1 BENVENUTO ST. CLAIR & AVENUE ROAD TORONTO ON 2 1 BIGGIN DDP PARTNERSHIP 1 BIGGIN LTD. 1 BIGGIN COURT NORTH YORK ON 3 1 EVA MELIA CORPORATION 1 EVA ROAD SUITE #412 ETOBICOKE ON 4 1 FINANC CONCERT PROPERTIES 200 BAY STREET- SOUTH TOWER SUITE 2100- PO BOX 56 TORONTO ON 5 1 LONGBRID BERKLEY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC 1 LONGBRIDGE ROAD 2ND FL THORNHILL ON 6 10 DORA VILLA LASFLORES C/O FOCUS PROPERTIE 10 DORA AVENUE TORONTO- ON 7 10 HOLMES HALTON COMMUNITY HOUSING 10 HOLMESWAY PLACE ACTON ON 8 100 CANYON DEL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 100 CANYON AVENUE BATHURST & SHEPPARD NORTH YORK ON 9 100 CEDAR LAWRENCE CONSTRUCTION 100 CEDAR AVENUE YONGE & MAJOR MACKENZIE WEST RICHMOND HILL ON 10 100 GOWAN KANCO - 100 GOWAN LTD. 100 GOWAN AVENUE PAPE & DANFORTH EAST YORK ON
It seems inserting records takes a relatively long time. My guess is it needs time to allocate disk space for the extra space needed. Assuming this is true, are there any DB settings that allow auto space allocation in bigger chunk? I am looking for something like "DB growth factor" or " Table growth factor"
I have a query that takes 1,5second to execute, but only 150ms of CPU. The query is quite simple, just one where statement against a clustered index.
SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 156 ms, elapsed time = 1595 ms.
SELECT column1, column3, column4, ..., column10 FROM table WHERE column2 IN (37, 41, 43, 45, 49, 53, 55) ORDER BY column3 DESC
|--Sort(TOP 1000, ORDER BY:([u].[LastActivityDate] DESC)) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__searchtest].[cix___searchtest_] AS [u]), SEEK:([u].[searchparamid]=37 OR [u].[searchparamid]=41 OR [u].[searchparamid]=43 OR [u].[searchparamid]=45 OR [u].[searchparamid]=49 OR [u].[searchparamid]=53 OR [u].[searchparamid]=55 OR [u].[searchparamid]=59) ORDERED FORWARD)
I have tried to rewrite the query to an INNER JOIN instead.
|--Sort(TOP 1000, ORDER BY:([u].[LastActivityDate] DESC)) |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([spal].[number])) |--Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__search_parameters_lookup].[IX___search_parameters_lookup] AS [spal]), SEEK:([spal].[hash]=-1726604993) ORDERED FORWARD) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__searchtest].[cix___searchtest_] AS [u]), SEEK:([u].[searchparamid]=[spal].[number]) ORDERED FORWARD)
but the query still takes 1,5 seconds.
It spends 59% (according to execution plan) of sorting. 14% for the index seek of the __search_parameters_lookup table and then 24% of a clustered index seek of the __searchtest table.
How come it only uses that small of CPU but it still takes 1,5 seconds? It seems to be reading from memory as well so it shouldnt be an IO-problem?
The index I have on the table is a clustered index on (column 2).
Any ideas of how I can improve this? I have tried with DTA, also with a non clustered index on column3.
If I remove some columns from the SELECT-list the query will execute alot faster:
SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 32 ms, elapsed time = 32 ms.
Booth the CPU and the elapsed time goes down and now appears to be more normal.
So there seems to be a problem caused by data transfer. I tried to do a remake and normalize the table and when I do that I get the query execute with a speed of 400ms CPU and 400ms total. And this is still the exact same result, so why does it only spend 400ms of "rendering" or fetching the data when the tables are normalized but 1500ms when its denormalized?
Any ideas?
I am running Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2039
I have a query that takes 1,5second to execute, but only 150ms of CPU. The query is quite simple, just one where statement against a clustered index.
SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 156 ms, elapsed time = 1595 ms.
Code Snippet
SELECT column1, column3, column4, ..., column10 FROM table WHERE column2 IN (37, 41, 43, 45, 49, 53, 55) ORDER BY column3 DESC
Code Snippet
|--Sort(TOP 1000, ORDER BY:([u].[LastActivityDate] DESC)) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__searchtest].[cix___searchtest_] AS [u]), SEEK:([u].[searchparamid]=37 OR [u].[searchparamid]=41 OR [u].[searchparamid]=43 OR [u].[searchparamid]=45 OR [u].[searchparamid]=49 OR [u].[searchparamid]=53 OR [u].[searchparamid]=55 OR [u].[searchparamid]=59) ORDERED FORWARD)
I have tried to rewrite the query to an INNER JOIN instead.
Code Snippet
|--Sort(TOP 1000, ORDER BY:([u].[LastActivityDate] DESC)) |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([spal].[number])) |--Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__search_parameters_lookup].[IX___search_parameters_lookup] AS [spal]), SEEK:([spal].[hash]=-1726604993) ORDERED FORWARD) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([MP].[dbo].[__searchtest].[cix___searchtest_] AS [u]), SEEK:([u].[searchparamid]=[spal].[number]) ORDERED FORWARD)
but the query still takes 1,5 seconds.
It spends 59% (according to execution plan) of sorting. 14% for the index seek of the __search_parameters_lookup table and then 24% of a clustered index seek of the __searchtest table.
How come it only uses that small of CPU but it still takes 1,5 seconds? It seems to be reading from memory as well so it shouldnt be an IO-problem?
The index I have on the table is a clustered index on (column 2).
Any ideas of how I can improve this? I have tried with DTA, also with a non clustered index on column3.
If I remove some columns from the SELECT-list the query will execute alot faster:
SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 32 ms, elapsed time = 32 ms.
Booth the CPU and the elapsed time goes down and now appears to be more normal.
So there seems to be a problem caused by data transfer. I tried to do a remake and normalize the table and when I do that I get the query execute with a speed of 400ms CPU and 400ms total. And this is still the exact same result, so why does it only spend 400ms of "rendering" or fetching the data when the tables are normalized but 1500ms when its denormalized?
Any ideas?
I am running Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2039
I have issued the following ALTER TABLE CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT on a table which has around 100K rows and it is taking long time (it's been more than 30 mins the alter table is running) to add the constraint. Is this normal or should I kill the process.
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[tblAbsHeqAnalyticOutputSimulationPathValues] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [CK_tblAbsHeqAnalyticOutputSimulationPathValues_1] CHECK ([dbo].[svfConstraintVerifyTableUniqueActiveEntryFacade]('tblAbsHeqAnalyticOutputSimulationPathValues')<=(1) AND [dbo].[svfConstraintVerifyTableUniqueActiveEntryFacade]('tblAbsHeqAnalyticOutputSimulationPathValues')>=(0))
I am having a serious problem which I need some help with regarding our SQL Server backup.
Basically it has started to take ages (as in 48hrs +), when it should only take about 4 hrs. The database is only 380GB and up until monday our backups have not been completing. When I check the activity monitor I have seen that the 'BACKUP DATABASE' process is set to suspended with a huge wait time and the wait type is ASYNC_IO_COMPLETION.
I am not sure how to solve this, but I am going to have to!
So if anyone has any ideas please help me! If you need any othe info please let me know.
I have written a UDF into which I pass a table name, field name, value of the field, whether alpha characters are valid, whether numerics are valid, and a string of alphanumerics that are valid. I return back a string with all invalid characters removed. Unfortunately when I use this on names and addresses in an 12000 row table, it takes forever to run. Can anyone think of an easy way to do this which isn't so labour intensive. Please see code below.
NB CHAR(32) is space, CHAR(45) is -,CHAR(39) is '
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.UDF_RemoveInvalidCharacters ( @sTableName varchar(50),-- e.g. 'Contact' @sFieldname varchar(50),-- e.g. 'Lastname' @sFieldValue varchar(500),-- e.g. 'Jeremi@h O''Grady84' @sAlphaValid char(1),-- e.g. 'Y' @sNumericValid char(1),--e.g. 'N' @sAlphanumericsValid varchar(500))--'CHAR(32):CHAR(45):CHAR(39)' RETURNS varchar(500) AS BEGIN DECLARE @sReturnValue varchar(500), @nTableID int, @nFieldLength int, @nCurrentPos int, @sTestChar char(1), @sValid char(1), @nAlphanumericPos int, @sAlphanumericTest varchar(8), @sTempTestChar varchar(8), @sAlphasFound char(1), @sNumericsFound char(1), @sAlphanumericsFound char(1)
--Get ID of table that the field is on SELECT @nTableID = [id] FROM SYSOBJECTS WHERE [name] = @sTableName
--Get the length of the field SELECT @nFieldLength = sc.length FROM SYSOBJECTS so, SYSCOLUMNS sc WHERE so.id = @nTableID AND sc.id = @nTableID AND sc.name = @sFieldName
--Initialise values SET @sReturnValue = '' SET @nCurrentPos = 1 SET @sValid = 'N' SET @sAlphasFound = 'N' SET @sNumericsFound = 'N' SET @sAlphanumericsFound = 'N'
--Test each character to ensure it is valid before adding it to the return string, a string consisting solely of alphanumeric characters would be wrong WHILE @nFieldLength >= @nCurrentPos BEGIN SET @sTestChar = substring(@sFieldValue,@nCurrentPos,1) IF @sAlphaValid = 'Y' --alphas are valid BEGIN IF UPPER(@sTestChar) in ('A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O','P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z') BEGIN SET @sValid = 'Y' SET @sAlphasFound = 'Y' END
END IF @sNumericValid = 'Y' AND @sValid <> 'Y'--numerics are valid BEGIN IF @sTestChar in ('0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9') BEGIN SET @sValid = 'Y' SET @sNumericsFound = 'Y' END END SET @nAlphanumericPos = 1 WHILE LEN(@sAlphanumericsValid) > @nAlphanumericPos AND @sValid <> 'Y' --alphanumerics that are valid BEGIN IF CHARINDEX(':',SUBSTRING(@sAlphanumericsValid,@nAlphanumericPos,LEN(@sAlphanumericsValid))) > 0 BEGIN SET @sAlphanumericTest = SUBSTRING(@sAlphanumericsValid,@nAlphanumericPos,CHARINDEX(':',SUBSTRING(@sAlphanumericsValid,@nAlphanumericPos,LEN(@sAlphanumericsValid)))-1) END ELSE BEGIN SET @sAlphanumericTest = SUBSTRING(@sAlphanumericsValid,@nAlphanumericPos,(LEN(@sAlphanumericsValid)-@nAlphanumericPos)+1) END SET @sTempTestChar = 'CHAR(' + RTRIM(LTRIM(STR(ASCII(@sTestChar)))) + ')' IF @sTempTestChar = @sAlphanumericTest AND (@sAlphasFound = 'Y' OR @sNumericsFound = 'Y') --alphanumerics are only valid once we have alpha or numerics BEGIN SET @sValid = 'Y' SET @sAlphanumericsFound = 'Y' END SET @nAlphanumericPos = @nAlphanumericPos + LEN(@sAlphanumericTest) + 1 END IF @sValid = 'Y' BEGIN SELECT @sReturnValue = @sReturnValue + @sTestChar END SET @nCurrentPos = @nCurrentPos + 1 SELECT @sValid = 'N' END IF @sAlphanumericsFound = 'Y' AND @sNumericsFound = 'N' AND @sAlphasFound = 'N' --alphanumerics on their own are not valid BEGIN SELECT @sReturnValue = '' END RETURN @sReturnValue --in the example I would get Jeremih O'Grady
Below is my query which is taking a long time to execute, DB is SQL Server 2005 through a web Application I have downloaded the latest MS SQL 2005 driver 1.xxx and still the query takes long to execute
The Description field is a Full_text indexed catalog column the p.vendornumber is a primary key same with c.ID
Any one have an idea why it is taking this long to run
The Execution Time is: 13640 ms Which I think is very long
SELECT Upper(p.Type) Type,p.Modelname,p.partno,Upper(p.description) description, Upper(p.classification)classification,p.vendornumber,p.mfg, p.price,c.CompanyName,c.City,c.State,p.thumbnail FROM P_all p, Acts c WHERE p.vendornumber = c.ID AND CONTAINS(p.Description, '"helmet*"') Order by p.VendorNumber
dear guys. i have this one problem, where the sql statements really took very long time to be processed. It took more than 1 minute, depending on the total data in the table. I guest this have to do with the 'count' statements. here is the code:
------------------------------------------------------------ $sql = "SELECT company,theID,abbs,A as Active,N as Nonactive,(A+N) as Total FROM( select distinct D.nama As company, C.domID As theID, D.abbrew As abbs, count(distinct case when B.ids is NOT NULL THEN A.dauserid END) As A, count(distinct case when B.ids is NULL THEN A.dauserid END) As N FROM tableuser A LEFT OUTER JOIN tabletranscript B on (A.dauserid=B.dauserid) INNER JOIN thedommember C ON(C.entitybuktiID=1 AND C.mypriority=1 AND
C.entitybuktiID=A.dauserid) INNER JOIN mydomain D ON (C.domID=".$getID.") GROUP BY D.nama, C.domID, D.abbrew ORDER BY company )";
Hope any of you can simplify this statements into a query that doesnt take ages to be processed.
I have a stored proc that is taking way too long to process, over 50 minutes.
What I need to do is go through 180K rows, and if the projId and langid is the same, increment 1 to a value, if not, reset the incrementer
I am doing the following at the moment
DECLARE @Id int, @ProjectId int, @LangCode char(6) DECLARE @CurProjectId int, @CurLangCode char(6) DECLARE @incrementer int DECLARE Order_cursor CURSOR FOR
SELECT Id, langCode, projectid FROM #tempTable
OPEN Order_cursor SET @incrementer = 1 FETCH NEXT FROM Order_cursor INTO @Id, @LangCode, @ProjectId WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0 BEGIN IF(@CurProjectId = @ProjectId) AND (@CurLangCode = @LangCode) BEGIN SET @incrementer = @incrementer + 1 END ELSE BEGIN SET @incrementer = 1 END UPDATE #tempTable SET edbOrder = @incrementer WHERE Id = @id SET @CurProjectId = @ProjectId SET @CurLangCode = @LangCode FETCH NEXT FROM Order_cursor INTO @Id, @LangCode, @ProjectId END CLOSE Order_cursor DEALLOCATE Order_cursor
I have a table with 3 columns and 20 million records. first 2 columns have VARCHAR(4) data type and third column is VARCHAR(5000). I put 3rd column under FULLTEXT and implement a normal INDEX on 1st column. Now when i try to search
SELECT
TOP 20
col1, col3 FROM
tbl WHERE
col1 = '1234' AND
CONTAINS(col3,'"market*"')
I am facing following problems 1- It hang for like 1 minute and give 2 records, whereas if i remove col1='1234' from where clause it take less than 1 second. 2- Some time it show criteria is too complex, although i am only requesting a single word in col3.
I am noob in FULL-TEXT but i have done all research in books, microsoft forum and Google and not getting any information.
I have a stored procedure that is taking too long to complete. I'ved narrowed the problem down to the following code. Is there any reason why this should take long to complete for about 40,000 records?
UPDATE Entries
SET EntryStatus = 1, reason = 'code entered more than once'
WHERE TimeSubmitted > @StartOfPeriod AND TimeSubmitted < @EndOfPeriod
AND TimeSubmitted <> @t and ShortCode = @ShortCode
We have to support forced failover under certain scenarios. Whilst using 'ForceFailoverAndAllowDataLoss' work perfectly the database is not available for several minutes. The failover command returns very quickly, but the database enters a recovery/restore state and will not accept connections for up to 2 minutes.
Am I missing an additional step that would speed this up?
Hi All,I am facing problem in MS SQL Server 2000. It is behaving slow forselect statements. It is even slower than MS ACCESS. For example, if iuse"Select count(*) from tbl;". i get the results after long time ifthere is more than 100k rows. What might be the possible reasons forthis??ThanksHoque
