I have a unique index based on the following columns:
ProjectID (int)
MaterialCatalogID (int)
Material catalogues are pretty much static but projects are dynamic and
people are most likely to be working on the latest project so would
using a descending sort on the ProjectID in the index gain any
performance?
can any one help me to sort a table on the basis of one colomn without using ORDER BY Desc.
Rahul Arora
07 Batch
NCCE Israna,
######################
IMPOSSIBLE = I+M+POSSIBLE
Hi,
I am developing database support for my application and I am using EDB. I would like to use sort orders to make the code easier but I was wondering if sort orders generate index tables. I mean, do they only sort the records during addition or they also generate index tables to speed up queries. In other words, do they make the database file bigger?
In the MSDN documentation I can not find anything on this.
Thanks,
Giulio
Here is my sp. I want it to order by descending date, but now it is 1st Feb it is putting this at the bottom, though January is still sorted fine. I need the dates to display in UK format dd/mm/yy
CREATE Procedure [dbo].[spRMU_CountNoDailyUsers]
AS
SELECT CONVERT(varchar, Log_DateTime, 103) AS Date_Logged_In, Log_Username as Username, COUNT(Log_Username) AS No_Logins
FROM tblUserLog
Where Log_Printed =0
GROUP BY CONVERT(varchar, Log_DateTime, 103) , Log_Username
ORDER BY CONVERT(varchar, Log_DateTime, 103) desc, No_Logins desc
GO
Hey guys, I have a view with dates (TheDate) meant to be arranged in descending order. When I 'Execute SQL' while in the view, the DESC order works just fine and shows up with the latest date first going down. However, once I 'OPEN VIEW' the order keeps defaulting to ASCending order.
How do I keep it in DESC order for viewing? Here's the statement:
SELECT TOP (100) PERCENT TheDate
FROM dbo.MyDates
ORDER BY TheDate DESC
I have a Column which has both numeric values and Alphabets in them.I want to sort them in descending with numbers first and then Alphabets later.
Example:
Source column:
2008
2005
2010
2013
All-Year
Month-year
Required Output:
Source Column:
2013
2010
2008
2005
Month-Year
All-year
I have been using Access 2003 as a front end to a SQL 2k database. Dates are sorted in a descending fashion. I recently upgraded the sql server database to 2005 and dates can no longer be sorted properly. I have set the database compatibility level to sql2000 within the sql2005 database engine but no luck. Any suggetions on how to fix this?
Thanks in advance.
I am trying to sort this simplied table:
ID - Time
1 2000-2001
2 2002-
3 2001-2003
4 1999
5 2005-2006
I want this as a result:
1999
2000-2001
2001-2003
2005-2006
2002-
Because the "-" means "continues", it the thing is still activated, so if it makes it easier, i could put the today's year afterwards during the query, if it ends with a - ...
Now, simply doing a
SELECT * FROM [table] ORDER BY TIME;
Sorts it "perfectly", apart from the "2002-" is just placed before 2005 and after 2001.
So, of course, it fails on all entries with a leading "-" ...
Right when I clicked "submit", of course, I can simply replace all entries with a time ending with "-", with the todays Year, so at least they will get at the end of the query...
Well, have to do a union, first sorting all without the "-", then sorting all with the "-", and that should be it...
Below SQL gives the results of 2 columns and I need the DepartmentandDate column to be ORDER BY on date desc for that CID. Expected result is in the screenshot(attachment)...
IF OBJECT_ID('Tempdb..#tTable') IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #tTable
CREATE TABLE #tTable(CID INT, CDate DATETIME, Dept VARCHAR(25))
INSERT INTO #tTable(CID, CDate, Dept)
VALUES
(111, '2014-01-14 00:00:00.000','B is alphabet'),
[Code] ....
I am trying to set sorting up on a DataGrid in ASP.NET 2.0. I have it working so that when you click on the column header, it sorts by that column, what I would like to do is set it up so that when you click the column header again it sorts on that field again, but in the opposite direction. I have it working using the following code in the stored procedure: CASE WHEN @SortColumn = 'Field1' AND @SortOrder = 'DESC' THEN Convert(sql_variant, FileName) end DESC,
case when @SortColumn = 'Field1' AND @SortOrder = 'ASC' then Convert(sql_variant, FileName) end ASC,
case WHEN @SortColumn = 'Field2' and @SortOrder = 'DESC' THEN CONVERT(sql_variant, Convert(varchar(8000), FileDesc)) end DESC,
case when @SortColumn = 'Field2' and @SortOrder = 'ASC' then convert(sql_variant, convert(varchar(8000), FileDesc)) end ASC,
case when @SortColumn = 'VersionNotes' and @SortOrder = 'DESC' then convert(sql_variant, convert(varchar(8000), VersionNotes)) end DESC,
case when @SortColumn = 'VersionNotes' and @SortOrder = 'ASC' then convert(sql_variant, convert(varchar(8000), VersionNotes)) end ASC,
case WHEN @SortColumn = 'FileDataID' and @SortOrder = 'DESC' THEN CONVERT(sql_variant, FileDataID) end DESC,
case WHEN @SortColumn = 'FileDataID' and @SortOrder = 'ASC' THEN CONVERT(sql_variant, FileDataID) end ASC And I gotta tell you, that is ugly code, in my opinion. What I am trying to do is something like this: case when @SortColumn = 'Field1' then FileName end,
case when @SortColumn = 'FileDataID' then FileDataID end,
case when @SortColumn = 'Field2' then FileDesc
when @SortColumn = 'VersionNotes' then VersionNotes
end
case when @SortOrder = 'DESC' then DESC
when @SortOrder = 'ASC' then ASC
end and it's not working at all, i get an error saying: Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'case' when i put a comma after the end on line 5 i get: Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'DESC' What am I missing here? Thanks in advance for any help -Madrak
please explain the differences btween this logical & phisicall operations that we can see therir graphical icons in execution plan tab in Management Studio
thank you in advance
I am using Full Text Index to index emails stored in BLOB column in a table. Index process parses stored emails, and, if there is one or more files attached to the email these documents get indexed too. In result when I'm querying the full text index for a word or phrase I am getting reference to the email containing the word of phrase if interest if the word was used in the email body OR if it was used in any document attached to the email.
How to distinguish in a Full Text query that the result came from an embedded document rather than from "main" document? Or if that's not possible how to disable indexing of embedded documents?
My goal is either to give a user an option if he or she wants to search emails (email bodies only) OR emails AND documents attached to them, or at least clearly indicate in the returned result the real source where the word or phrase has been found.
Dear All.
We had Teradata 4700 SMP. We have moved data from TD to MS_SQL SERVER 2003. records are 19.65 Millions.
table is >> Order_Dtl
Columns are:-
Client_ID varchar 10
Order_ID varchar 50
Order_Sub_ID decimal
.....
...
..
.
Pk is (ClientID+OrderId+OrderSubID)
Web Base application or PDA devices use to initiate the order from all over the country. The issue is this table is not Partioned but good HP with 30 GB RAM is installed. this is main table that receive 18,0000 hits or more. All brokers and users are using this table to see the status of their order.
The always search by OrderID, or ClientID or order_SubNo, or enter any two like (Client_ID+Order_Sub_ID) or any combination.
Query takes to much time when ever server receive more querys. some orther indexes are also created on the same table like (OrderDate, OrdCreate Date and Status)
My Question are:-
Q1. IF Person "A" query to DB on Client_ID, then what Index will use ? (If any one do Query on any two combination like Client_ID+Order_ID, So what index will be uesd.? How does MS-SQL SERVER deal with these kind of issues.?
Q2. If i create 3 more indexes on ClientID, ORderID and OrdersubID. will this improve the performance of query.if person "A" search record on orderNo so what index will be used. (Mind it their would be 3 seprate indexes for Each PK columns) and composite-Clustered index is also available.?
Q3. I want to check what indexes has been used? on what search?
Q4. How can i check what table was populated when, or last date of update (DML)?
My Limitation is i Dont Create a Partioned table. I dont have permission to do it.
In Teradata we had more than 4 tb record of CRM data with no issue. i am not new baby in db line but not expert in sql server 2003.
I am thank u to all who read or reply.
Arshad
Manager Database
Esoulconsultancy.com
(Teradata Master)
10g OCP
My SSIS package is running very slow taking so much time to execute, One task is taking 2hr for inserting 100k records, i have disabled unused index still it is taking time.I am rebuilding/Refreshing indexes and stats once in month if i try to execute on daily basis will it improve my SSIS Package performance?
View 2 Replies View RelatedKeep getting this error when positioning to the last page of a report.
Using Server 2003...SqlRpt Svcs 2000 sp2
Detail error msg:
Exception of type Microsoft.ReportingServices.ReportRendering.ReportRenderingException was thrown. (rrRenderingError) Get Online Help
Exception of type Microsoft.ReportingServices.ReportRendering.ReportRenderingException was thrown.
Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection. Parameter name: index
Anyone have any suggestions? Any way to find out what collection is blowing?...or where parameter name: index comes from?
hello friends
i have table1 and 200 coulumn of table1 :) i have 647.600 records. i entered my records to table1 with for step to code lines in one day :)
i select category1 category2 and category3 with select code but i have just one index.. it is productnumber and it is primarykey..So my select code lines is so slow.. it is 7-9 second.. how can i select in 0.1 second ? Should i create index for category1 and category2 and category3 ? But i dont know create index.. My select code lines is below.. Could you learn me and show me index for it ?? or Could you learn me and show me fast Select code lines and index or etc ??? Also my search code line have a dangerous releated to attaching table1 with hackers :)
cheersi send 3 value of treview1 node and childnode and child.childnode to below page.aspx :)
Protected Sub Page_Load(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Me.Load
If Not Me.IsPostBack Then
If Request("TextBox1") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox1.Text = Request("TextBox1")
End If
If Request("TextBox2") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox2.Text = Request("TextBox2")
End If
If Request("TextBox3") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox3.Text = Request("TextBox3")
End If
End If
Dim searchword As String
If Request("TextBox3") = "" And Request("TextBox2") = "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "'"
End If
If Request("TextBox3") = "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "' and kategori1= '" & Request("TextBox2") & "'"
End If
If Request("TextBox3") <> "" And Request("TextBox2") <> "" And Request("TextBox1") <> "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "' and kategori1= '" & Request("TextBox2") & "' and kategori2= '" & Request("TextBox3") & "'"
End If
SqlDataSource1.SelectCommand = searchword
End Sub
Hi,
I'm running a merge replication on a sql2k machine to 6 sql2k subscribers.
Since a few day's only one of the merge agents fail's with the following error:
The merge process could not retrieve generation information at the 'Subscriber'.
The index entry for row ID was not found in index ID 3, of table 357576312, in database 'PBB006'.
All DBCC CHECKDB command's return 0 errors :confused:
I'm not sure if the table that's referred to in the message is on the distribution side or the subscribers side? A select * from sysobjects where id=357576312 gives different results on both sides . .
Any ideas as to what is causing this error?
Hi everyone,
When we create a clustered index firstly, and then is it advantageous to create another index which is nonclustered ??
In my opinion, yes it is. Because, since we use clustered index first, our rows are sorted and so while using nonclustered index on this data file, finding adress of the record on this sorted data is really easier than finding adress of the record on unsorted data, is not it ??
Thanks
I have a clustered index that consists of 3 int columns in this order: DateKey, LocationKey, ItemKey (there are many other columns in this data warehouse table such as quantities, prices, etc.).
Now I want to add a non-clustered index on just one of the other columns, say LocationKey, like this:
CREATE INDEX IX_test on TableName (LocationKey)
I understand that the clustered index keys will also be added as key columns to any NC indexes. So, in this case the NC index will also get the other two columns from the clustered index added as key columns. But, in what order will they be added?
Will the resulting index keys on this new NC index effectively be:
LocationKey, DateKey, ItemKey
OR
LocationKey, ItemKey, DateKey
Do the clustering keys get added to a NC index in the same order as they are defined in the clustered index?
Quick question about the primary purpose of Full Text Index vs. Clustered Index.
The Full Text Index has the purpose of being accessible outside of the database so users can query the tables and columns it needs while being linked to other databases and tables within the SQL Server instance.
Is the Full Text Index similar to the global variable in programming where the scope lies outside of the tables and database itself?
I understand the clustered index is created for each table and most likely accessed within the user schema who have access to the database.
Is this correct?
I am kind of confused on why you would use full text index as opposed to clustered index.
Thank you
Goldmember
Hi All,
I 'm working to improve some sql performance.
One of the major syntax inside the SELECT statment is ..
WHERE FIELDA IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='A') AND
WHERE FIELDB IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='B') AND
WHERE FIELDC IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='C') AND
WHERE FIELDD IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='D') AND
WHERE FIELDE IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='E') AND
WHERE FIELDF IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='F')
(It's to compare the field content with some user input parameter inside a parameter table... )
I think properly is that the SELECT ... IN is causing much slowness in the sql statement. I have indexed FIELDA , FIELDB, FILEDC etc and those PARAVALUE and PARATYPE in the PARATABLE table. But perfromance is still slow and execution takes >20 seconds for 200000 rows of records.
Do any one know if still any chance to improvide the performance like this?
Much Thanks,
Andy
I'm trying to find whether there is a dmv or system view that can help me see the last time an index was rebuilt or created. Assuming I rebuilt an index using tsql commands (not a job with a history), is there a way to find out the last time that index was rebuilt?
Thanks much.
I have a really strange problem.
I execute this query:
declare @cid int
set @cid = 2003227
select * from sales s, product p where p.product_Id = s.product_Id and customer_id = @cid
select * from sales s, product p where p.product_Id = s.product_Id and customer_id = @cid or @cid = 0
3 Million rows in sales, 120000 in product.
The first does and index seek, the second an index scan.
The execution plan reports that the scan takes 99.87% of the cost, and the seek takes 0.13%
This problem obviously gets worse the bigger the dataset / query /etc.
The reason I query this, is because it never used to take this long to do index scans. Is there something i can change, something i can fix?
Any help would be appreciated.
Josh
Hi,
I just want to know whether any advantage or disadvantage
in doing Reorganize Index And Rebuild Index ....
Plz do comment on this ASAP !!!!
Thanks in advance
Regards
Arv
Hi,
I just want to know whether any advantage or disadvantage
in doing Reorganize Index And Rebuild Index ....
Plz do comment on this ASAP !!!!
Thanks in advance
Regards
Arv
Hello I want to learn disparity clustered index or nonclustered index and in queries which one run better.
example
select * from orders where orderID=5
to this query clustered or nonclustered
thanks
the query:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN (
SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada
WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
takes 30-60 seconds to run on my machine, due to a clustered index scan on our an index on asset [about half a million rows]. For this particular association less than 50 rows are returned.
expanding the inner select into a list of guids the query runs instantly:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN (
'0F9C1654-9FAC-45FC-9997-5EBDAD21A4B4',
'52C616C0-C4C5-45F4-B691-7FA83462CA34',
'C95A6669-D6D1-460A-BC2F-C0F6756A234D')
It runs instantly because of doing a clustered index seek [on the same index as the previous query] instead of a scan. The index in question IX_Asset_AssociationGuid is a nonclustered index on Asset.AssociationGuid.
The tables involved:
Asset, represents an asset. Primary key is AssetGuid, there is an index/FK on Asset.AssociationGuid. The asset table has 28 columns or so...
Association, kind of like a place, associations exist in a tree where one association can contain any number of child associations. Each association has a ParentAssociationGuid pointing to its parent. Only leaf associations contain assets.
AssociationDataAssociation, a table consisting of two columns, AssociationGuid, DataAssociationGuid. This is a table used to quickly find leaf associations [DataAssociationGuid] beneath a particular association [AssociationGuid]. In the above case the inner select () returns 3 rows.
I'd include .sqlplan files or screenshots, but I don't see a way to attach them.
I understand I can specify to use the index manually [and this also runs instantly], but for such a simple query it is peculiar it is necesscary. This is the query with the index specified manually:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WITH (INDEX (IX_Asset_AssociationGuid)) WHERE
a.AssociationGuid IN (
SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada
WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
To repeat/clarify my question, why might this not be doing a clustered index seek with the first query?
i encounter this error..
Cannot sort a row of size 8107, which is greater than the allowable maximum
of 8094.?
why this error occur? can someone explain? how to avoid this? thanks!!
We are using a modeling technique called Anchor Modeling in our data warehouses. You can read more about the technique itself at our homepage http://www.intellibis.se, where we have published a fact sheet and a recently held presentation (TDWI European conference). One of the features with this technique is its simple way to historize data. This is done by having a fromDate column which together with the surrogate key will yield a unique combination. On the tables that has this kind of historization we add a primary key, which in turn will create a clustered index, with the following specification (surrogateKey asc, fromDate desc). This will physically order data on the storage media according to the specificed columns and ordering. Now I move on to create a "latest view" of this table which does a subselect to find the latest version for every surrogateKey using max(fromDate). Should not the optimizer now figure out that data is ordered so that the latest version always comes first for every surrogateKey, hence any sorting would be unneccessary? If I look at the actual execution plan after running a query that uses the view there is a sort in the plan, but the cost is always 0%. Does this mean that it did not sort the data, or that it did call a sorting routine, but it actually took very little time to do the sorting? If so, is there a reason that is has to do the sorting or could it have been left out by an even smarter optimizer?
I would also like to applaud the people behind the optimizer, since it will figure out which tables are in fact necessary to query and eliminate others, even if I have left joined them into the view I am using. This speeds up performance and makes anchor modeling feasible. Unfortunately optimizers from other vendors seem to have trouble doing this...
Regards,
Lars
I've been racking my brain all day and I finally decided to ask for help. I've got two tables with rows from the first that need to be sorted by the second. The problem is that the rows don't always exist in the second table. I've tried various forms of INNER, LEFT, RIGHT, OUTER, LEFT OUTER, CROSS, etc., etc., etc. and nothing (oh yeah UNION too). Every time I get close, I lose the records that don't have matches.
Something close-
SELECT A.IDDoc, B.First
FROM A
LEFT JOIN B
ON A.IDDoc = B.IDDoc
WHERE B.Dept = 'A'
ORDER BY B.First
Example Data
Table A
IDDoc Document
---------------------------
1 1467.doc
2 8722.doc
3 A47F.doc
4 88DQ.doc
5 ABCD.doc
Table B
IDDoc Dept First
----------------------------
1 A John
2 A Bob
3 A Ralph
4 A Diane
Results I Want
IDDoc First
-------------------
5 NULL
2 Bob
4 Diane
1 John
3 Ralph
Any help is appreciated. If I've posted in the wrong forum, please feel free to direct me to a better one.
Thanks in advance!
Jim
SELECT
LEFT(CONVERT(CHAR(11),convert(datetime,task_date),109),3) + ' ' +
RIGHT(CONVERT(CHAR(11),convert(datetime,task_date),109),4) as Date,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1000 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as Programming,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1016 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as Design,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1752 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as Upload,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1032 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as Testing,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1128 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as Meeting,SUM(CASE a.status_id WHEN 1172 THEN b.act_point ELSE 0 END) as OthersFrom
task_table a,act_table b where a.status_id=b.act_id and
a.user_id=(select user_id from user_table where user_name='Raghu') and
a.task_date like '%/%/2006' GROUP BYLEFT(CONVERT(CHAR(11),convert(datetime,task_date),109),3) + ' ' + RIGHT(CONVERT(CHAR(11),convert(datetime,task_date),109),4)Output :Aug 2006 294 0 0 80 0 0 Jan 2006 14 0 0 0 0 0 Oct 2006 336 0 0 0 0 0 Sep 2006 3262 20 24 8 16 0 How to sort the date in ascending Order ?Jan 2006Aug 2006Sep 2006Oct 2006
I have: 4 tables and 1 table variable.
CCenters (ID, Name)
Campaigns (ID, Name)
Rel (ID, CCenterID, CampaignID) - [many to many]
and @SCampaigns (ID, CampaignID) - represents the selected campaigns by the user
performing the commands below I would get the centers associated with the campaigns selected.SELECT CCenterID
FROM Rel
INNER JOIN @Campaigns ON @SCampaigns.CampaignID = Rel.CampaignID
But what I really want are the common centers to the selected campaigns.
Thanks
I am trying to select a record from a table where it has the smallest priority
how would you go about doing this
is there a cool sort command or is there a select command syntax that can do this
thanks