We have a table that we are using for inserts for every 2mins and it is a very large table.
I am panning to add this table to a separate file and file-group, so that i can keep this file in separate drive.And it will restore files level.
Is there any disadvantage if we create this table in this way.
we have many max fields in our database .
A role in performance says : It's better to separate this fields to another FileGroup with separate file.
Is the result good for performance? and what are the risks?
We are running SQL Server 2014 Enterprise Edition (64-Bit) on Windows 2012 R2 Standard (64-Bit).
1. When to create indexes, before or after data is added? Please address Clustered and Non-Clustered Indexes.
2. To move indexes to it's own filegroup, is it best to create the NON-Clustered Indexes on the separate filegroup with code similar to the example below?
CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_Employee_OrganizationLevel_OrganizationNode
ON HumanResources.Employee (OrganizationLevel, OrganizationNode)
WITH (DROP_EXISTING = ON)
ON TransactionsFG1;
GO
I have read the following links that states that if you create the Clustered Index on a separate filegroup, it would also move the base table to that particular filegroup. (So I take it that you ONLY can move NON-CLustered Indexes to a separate filegroup.)
Placing Indexes on Filegroups:
[URL]
By default, indexes are stored in the same filegroup as the base table on which the index is created. A nonpartitioned clustered index and the base table always reside in the same filegroup. However, you can do the following:
• Create nonclustered indexes on a filegroup other than the filegroup of the base table.
Move an Existing Index to a Different Filegroup:
[URL]
Limitations and Restrictions
• If a table has a clustered index, moving the clustered index to a new filegroup moves the table to that filegroup.
• You cannot move indexes created using a UNIQUE or PRIMARY KEY constraint using Management Studio. To move these indexes use the CREATE INDEX statement with the (DROP_EXISTING=ON) option in Transact-SQL.
Following a disk crash whilst building an index, the metadata for a 300 million row table has become corrupt.
The index was being built on a specific file/filegroup which I was able to mark offline and the Db continued to be usable.
Unfortunately one of our processes now fails (trying to use the index that was never complete). I can't diable the index, drop the table, truncate the table or delete the data. Partial restores of the Db excluding the offending filegroup are successful, but the problem continues to be there!!!
I'll be running SQL v7.0 with raid level 0. The DB will have approx. 250 tables and 1200 indexes.
Can you have the indexes located on a physically separate drive with SQL v7.0 and would this be the best practice?
Hello all,
What is an easy way of scripting all the database tables and sprocs automatically to a separate file each one? I can't find this option in SQL Server Management Studio.
Or is any other way of uploading all objects to a Visual Source Safe project that does not require to copy and paste each script into a VSS sql script?
Thanks!
David
Any disadvantage of having too many indexes?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm not sure if this is the appropriate forum to ask this question; however, here goes.
I'm being asked to create/modify a search engine for our Web site. Beyond trying to enhance the speed, I've been asked to add spelling and punctuation checks into the search text.
Right now, all that's being done is a simple like statement.
What's the best method to query a database?
For example, if someone typed in "A and W" or "A/Ws" to get the value"A & W's", how would I make the link? Is there a database table that exists that I could reference to replace & with and (or vice versa) , etc... Is there a good place to start?
Hi, I have looked and loked for the answer to this question and made no progress. I want to install MSDE on one of our servers, however, when I went to install it, I found that there was another MSDE already installed and running (it was an agent running with our backup software Veritas). Is it alright to create another database and have 2 running simultaneous on the same data engine? Is there any type of limitations that I sould know about - such as number of allowed accesses at one time? Any help is greatly appreicated.
View 1 Replies View RelatedSince installing the client tools for SQL 08 R2 on my laptop, I am running into the following error when trying to open a step within a SQL job:
Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio
Creating an instance of the COM component with CLSID {AA40D1D6-CAEF-4A56-B9BB-D0D3DC976BA2} from the IClassFactory failed due to the following error: c001f011. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ManagedDTS)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Creating an instance of the COM component with CLSID {AA40D1D6-CAEF-4A56-B9BB-D0D3DC976BA2} from the IClassFactory failed due to the following error: c001f011. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ManagedDTS)
Is there a patch out for this?
Code Block
Hi,
I'm working on a database for a financial client and part of what i need to do is calculate a value from two separate rows in the same table and insert the result in the same table as a new row. I have a way of doing so but i consider it to be extremely inelegant and i'm hoping there's a better way of doing it. A description of the existing database schema (which i have control over) will help in explaining the problem:
Table Name: metrics_ladder
id security_id metric_id value
1 3 80 125.45
2 3 81 548.45
3 3 82 145.14
4 3 83 123.32
6 4 80 453.75
7 4 81 234.23
8 4 82 675.42
.
.
.
Table Name: metric_details
id metric_id metric_type_id metric_name
1 80 2 Fiscal Enterprise Value Historic Year 1
2 81 2 Fiscal Enterprise Value Current Fiscal Year
3 82 2 Fiscal Enterprise value Forward Fiscal year 1
4 83 2 Fiscal Enterprise Value Forward Fiscal Year 2
5 101 3 Calendar Enterprise value Historic Year 1
6 102 3 Calendar Enterprise Value Current Fiscal Year
5 103 3 Calendar Enterprise value Forward Year 1
6 104 3 Calendar Enterprise Value Forward Year 2
Table Name: metric_type_details
id metric_type_id metric_type_name
1 1 Raw
2 2 Fiscal
3 3 Calendar
4 4 Calculated
The problem scenario is the following: Because a certain number of the securities have a fiscal year end that is different to the calendar end in addition to having fiscal data (such as fiscal enterprise value and fiscal earnings etc...) for each security i also need to store calendarised data. What this means is that if security with security_id = 3 has a fiscal year end of October then using rows with ids = 1, 2, 3 and 4 from the metrics_ladder table i need to calculate metrics with metric_id = 83, 84, 85 and 86 (as described in the metric_details table) and insert the following 4 new records into metrics_ladder:
id security_id metric_id value
1 3 101 <calculated value>
2 3 102 <calculated value>
3 3 103 <calculated value>
4 3 104 <calculated value>
Metric with metric_id = 101 (Calendar Enterprise value Historic Year 1) will be calculated by taking 10/12 of the value for metric_id 80 plus 2/12 of the value for metric_id 81.
Similarly, metric_id 102 will be equal to 10/12 of the value for metric_id 81 plus 2/12 of the value for metric_id 82,
metric_id 103 will be equal to 10/12 of the value for metric_id 82 plus 2/12 of the value for metric_id 83 and finally
metric_id 104 will be NULL (determined by business requirements as there is no data for forward year 3 to use).
As i could think of no better way of doing this (and hence the reason for this thread) I am currently achieving this by pivoting the relevant data from the metrics_ladder so that the required data for each security is in one row, storing the result in a new column then unpivoting again to store the result in the metrics_ladder table. So the above data in nmetrics_ladder becomes:
security_id 80 81 82 83 101 102
----------- -- -- -- -- -- --
3 125.45 548.45 145.14 123.32 <calculated value> <calculated value>
4 ...
.
.
.
which is then unpivoted.
The SQL that achieves this is more or less as follows:
*********
START SQL
*********
declare @calendar_averages table (security_id int, [101] decimal(38,19), [102] decimal(38,19), [103] decimal(38,19), [104] decimal(38,19),etc...)
-- Dummy year variable to make it easier to use MONTH() function
-- to convert 3 letter month to number. i.e. JAN -> 1, DEC -> 12 etc...
DECLARE @DUMMY_YEAR VARCHAR(4)
SET @DUMMY_YEAR = 1900;
with temp(security_id, metric_id, value)
as
(
select ml.security_id, ml.metric_id, ml.value
from metrics_ladder ml
where ml.metric_id in (80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,etc...)
-- only consider securities with fiscal year end not equal to december
and ml.security_id in (select security_id from company_details where fiscal_year_end <> 'dec')
)
insert into @calendar_averages
select temppivot.security_id
-- Net Income
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[80])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[81]) as [101]
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[81])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[82]) as [102]
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[82])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[83]) as [103]
,NULL as [104]
-- Share Holders Equity
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[84])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[85]) as [105]
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[85])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[86]) as [106]
,(CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR))/12*[86])
+((12 - CONVERT(DECIMAL, MONTH(cd.fiscal_year_end + @DUMMY_YEAR)))/12*[87]) as [107]
,NULL as [108]
-- Capex
-- Sales
-- Accounts payable
etc...
..
..
from temp
pivot
(
sum(value)
for metric_id in ([80],[81],[82],[83],[84],[85],[86],[87],[88],etc...)
) as temppivot
inner join company_details cd on temppivot.security_id = cd.security_id
*********
END SQL
*********
The result then needs to be unpivoted and stored in metrics_ladder.
And FINALLY, the question! Is there a more elegant way of achieving this??? I have complete control over the database schema so if creating mapping tables or anything along those lines would help it is possible. Also, is SQL not really suited for such operations and would it therefore be better done in C#/VB.NET.
Many thanks (if you've read this far!)
M.
I will be moving production SQL databases (one is 25Gb, the other is 3Gb) to a new server. One of the reasons is the old server has only IDE disks while the new has raid (I don't know the configuration yet).
Database 1 has a primary and one other filegroup. I want to spread the disk I/O by moving table A to it's own filegroup on it's own disk.
For the purposes of testing I have
1. brought a database onto a test server (using sp_detach_db, copying the files and attaching using sp_attach_db)
2. created a new filegroup
3. created a physical file on disk, allocated space and associated with my new filegroup
my question is how do I now move table A into this file?
I need to know if it is possible to move ONE table from an existing filegroup to another existing filegroup.
The answer I received to use ALTER database only modifies the file/filegroup name or changes the default filegroup.
Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.
Hi every body,
Is there anyone know the way to move a table with data to other file group?
I have created a new filegroup,and i want to add existing table to the file group.
I don't have the appropriate syntax for this.
Please Help.
Regards Mr. Mumin
Thanks All,
SQl experts and gurus:
How to move tables to the new filegroup which i created. suppose my database has only primary FG and after that i added one FG and due to performance reasons i want to move the existing table to NEW FG.
Thanks.
Is it possible to create a SQL schedule task to execute after 5days from the 28th of every month.
View 3 Replies View RelatedCan I create a filegroup on existnig table?If yes,How?
TIA
Is there anyway to move tables without any indexes to a filegroup?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI am trying to add 2 separate columns from separate tables i.e column1 should be added to column 2 when inserted and I want to use a trigger but i don't know the syntax to use...
View 14 Replies View RelatedHow can i format my query so that each piece of data appears on a new separate line? Is there a command for a new line feed? does not work.
thanks.
For example:
a: data
b: data
c: data
a: data
b: data
c: data
Hi There
I am running SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, i want to split my data and indexes on different drives.
In 2000 i had to recreate clustered indexes and non clustered indexes on the correct filegroups to accomplish this.
In 2005 i see there is a ALTER TABLE MOVE TO Filegroup option, thats cool.
Does this effectively do the same as rebuilding the clustered index on the new filegroup? Will this leave the other indexes of the table on the primay filegroup or move them as well ?
If i wanted to also move the non clustered indexes is there a better way to move them that drop and re-create on the new filegroup in 2005, i see the ALTER INDEX statement does not support a move to filegroup option.
In a nutshell what is the best/easiest way to move exisitng table data and indexes to new file groups in Sql Server 2005 Enterprise Edition?
Thanx
I've create a partition function and a partion scheme for my database.
Now I would like to change an existing table to use these partition.
The table is replicated.
How can I do this?
Thanks
Markus
I'm being asked to create multiple filegroups for a new database based on the table type, transaction, lookup, misc... From what i'm reading this doesn't make sense. I'm reading either large tables get file groups, nonclustered indexes when they are about the same size of the data, or a few other reasons...
First of all, we are talking about the same disk (please don't ask me about how it is configured) and I'm not sure yet if restoring separate file groups is even going to be necessary.
So here are my questions (beyond, the test and see what happens) because in the end I'm going to probably have to do what i'm told. So this is for my professional knowledge.
1. Does file groups separated by table type make sense?
2. Should you put tables that are queried often together in the same or different file groups.
3. I'm pretty sure you can't restore single file group for write access, am I correct?
I am using SQL Server 2000, SP3.I created an updatable partitioned view awhile ago and it has beenrunning smoothly for some time. The partition is on a DATETIME columnand it is partitioned by month. Each month a stored procedure isscheduled that creates the new month's table, and alters the view toinclude it. Again... working like a charm for quite some time.This past weekend I moved some of the first tables onto a new filegroup. I did this through Enterprise Manager, by going into designmode for the table, then going into the properties for the table andchanging the file group there as well as in all of the indexes. Nowthe partitioned view is no longer updatable. It gives the errormessage: "UNION ALL view '<view name>' is not updatable because apartitioning column was not found."I have extracted the DDL for all of the partition tables and comparedthem and they all look the same. I checked and then double-checked theCHECK constraints to make sure that they were all valid and they are.If I remove the tables that I moved to the new file group from theview, then it is once again updatable, but when I put them back in itfails again.Any ideas? If you would like samples of the code then I can send italong, but it's rather large, so I have not included it here.Thanks!Thomas R. Hummel
View 3 Replies View RelatedHi,
How to move existing table(include its constraint and index) into a different filegroup using tsql in Sql Server 2000. We have 1000+ tables in our system and we are planning to move around 500 tables to a new file group, which is available on another SAN drive.
Regards.
Sankar N
Hi,I am expanding our data warehouse solution with new filegroups onseveral subsystems.I want to know which idea is better!- create clustered indexes on tables to 'move' them to new filegroups- create these tables on the new filegroups.The background of this question is as follows:- we want the whole data on the new filegroups- we want to know if there is any difference in performance between the2 solutionsThanks in advance,Danny
View 4 Replies View RelatedI would like to 'one table' record to separate 'two or three tables'
. I just know use the DTS , try to import and export again and agian.
So trouble.
Could you give me some suggestions for me? For example ,
'Cursor' write in new table . But I try to SQL Server Books Online
which is not suitable for me solving problems. One table separate two
or three tables. Can you wirte the detail example for me?
Thx a lot.
Hi,
We are building an application for online system for people to place ADs for selling various used items like Car, Electronics, Houses, Books etc.
If someone selling a car then he can fill out headline, year, make, model, mileage, transmission, condition, color, price, description, contact etc.
Similarly if someone selling a digital camera he will fillout headline, memory, zoom, megapixel, maker, model, color, batter, description etc.
Option 1: I can have a main table to hold the common attributes of all different types of ADs (headline, images, contact, price, color, condition, description)
+ 1 table to store string values of all ADs (car: maker, model, square feet (if house), memory, megapixel (camera) etc)
+ 1 table to store the droplist select values(car: transmission, door, seat etc; house: year_built)
pros: single table for all ADs. unique IDs for all ADs, easy to extend as new attributes can be dropped easily.
cons: lot of physical reads of 2nd and 3rd table from join. 10 times physical reads compared to option 2 when reading 5000 records.
Option 2: have different set of table for each AD type. Car will have its own main table + 1 table to store multiselect list box values.
Similarly housing will have its own set of tables
pros: 10% less physical read than option 1.
cons: hard to add new attributes. We have to modify the main table by adding one column.
Query will go to different table based on the category.
Do you have any suggestions on which way to go?Thanks
I'm using SSRS SP2. I have a table with 1 group defined. I have a group footer that includes sub totals for each group. I have a table footer that includes my grand totals, but this footer will NOT print on a separate page even though I have 'Page Break At End' checked for the group. My groups correctly start on a new page, but when I get to my Grand Total footer line, it prints just after the last group sub-total line.
Any ideas what I might be doing wrong?
Thanks in advance,
Dawn J
How to purge data in transaction table or we can delete some data and store in separate table in data warehouse?
View 7 Replies View RelatedI have a stored procedure that is passed two values. Both are strings representations of GUID values, the first is a single value, the second is a comma delimited string of values.In the stored procedure I call a split function to separate the comma delimited values into a table and this is used in my WHERE clause to filter my select results.This is an example:
Code:
SELECT
item.uiGUID as ItemGUID,
stores.strStoreName as Store,
location.strLocationName as Location
FROM tblItems as item
INNER JOIN tblStoreLocations as location
ON item.uiLocationGUID = location.uiGUID
INNER JOIN tblStores as stores
ON location.uiStoreGUID = stores.uiGUID
WHERE CAST(item.uiGUID as varchar(36)) IN (SELECT Value FROM dbo.Split(',',@ItemGUIDList))
When I run this query in the management studio, passing a list of 5 values in the second parameter, my results include one item for each of the 5 values. However, when I pass the parameters from my ASP project, (I've verified the values I think are being passed are indeed being passed), I only get one item.I believe the error is in my split function. Both split functions return the same results in the SQL management studio, but only one returns the correct results in the the ASP project.
When I use this version of the function it returns the correct table values to the calling application, but it chokes when the item list does not have a trailing comma. I figure that to be a bug in the SQL function.
Code:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[Split]
( @Delimiter varchar(5),
@List varchar(8000)
)
RETURNS @TableOfValues table
( RowID smallint IDENTITY(1,1),
[Value] varchar(50)
[code]....
I have 1 table that is just a list of feeds. A, B, C, D etc (15 rows in total) and each feed has other information attached to it such as Full name, location etc etc. I am only interested in the Feed column.
Each feed then has a corresponding data table which contains a list of records. Eg Feed A data is contained in TableA, Feed B data is contains in TableB and so on.
Basically what I need is a combined table that shows the list of Feeds in the 1st Column ( So A, B, C, D…..) and then a second column which counts the records from each separate data table corresponding to that feed.
So the end result would look something like this:
Feed------No of Records
A----------4 (from TableA)
B----------7 (from TableB)
C----------8 (from TableC)
D----------1 (from TableD)
Possible?