Joining Views && Query Performance
May 1, 2006
Over the years I've read and experienced where joining more then 5 tables can lead to performance problems. This number can vary based upon the amount of data in each table, if and how indexes are used and the complexity of the query, but 5 has always been a good rule of thumb. Unfortunately I do not know what rule to apply in regards to joing views.
A developer has experienced timeout problems periodically when opening a view in EM or when running the code which makes-up the view. I decided to look at the view and noticed it references tables and views, which reference more views, which in turn reference other views. In all the initial view references 5 tables and 8 views directly and indirectly, with some of the views containing function calls. What are your thoughts on how many views and tables are too many when it comes to joins and query performance.
Thanks, Dave
View 6 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Oct 23, 2006
Ok, What I want to achieve is plain stuff, I want to join 2 views on a common key.It all works well with the SQL2000 Query Analyzer, but not trough ADO.NET or should I say my webapplication.With that I mean that my query return rows when executed from SQL2000 Query Analyzer, But not when used in my application or Executed from the Visual Studio Server Explorer.I have struggled with this one for several hours, I cant get this one right.So lets bring in the one who actually know what his doing View1: 1 select
2 cast((PS.RabattProsent/100.00)*PS.Pris AS decimal(11,2)) AS Rabatt
3 ,cast((PS.MVAProsent/100.00)*PS.Pris AS decimal(11,2)) AS MVA
4 ,cast(PS.Antall * ((PS.Pris*(100-PS.RabattProsent))/100)*((PS.MvaProsent/100.00)+1) AS decimal(11,2)) AS Belop
5 ,PS.*
6 ,K.Kunde_ID
7 FROM
8 tbl_ProduktSalg AS PS
9 INNER JOIN
10 tbl_Ordre AS O
11 ON
12 O.Ordre_ID = PS.Ordre_ID
13 INNER JOIN
14 tbl_Kunde AS K
15 ON
16 K.Kunde_ID = O.Kunde_IDView2: 1 SELECT
2 PS.Ordre_ID
3 ,SUM(cast((PS.RabattProsent/100.00)*PS.Pris AS decimal(11,2))) AS TotalRabatt
4 ,SUM(cast(PS.Antall * ((PS.Pris*(100-PS.RabattProsent))/100)*((PS.MvaProsent/100.00)+1) AS decimal(11,2))) AS TotalBelop
5 ,SUM(PS.Pris) AS TotalPris
6 ,SUM(cast((PS.MVAProsent/100.00)*PS.Pris AS decimal(11,2))) AS TotalMVA
7 FROM
8 tbl_ProduktSalg AS PS
9 GROUP BY
10 PS.Ordre_ID
MyQuery/SPRC: 1 create procedure %PROC% (@Kunde_ID int, @Ordre_ID int)
2 as
3 begin
4 SELECT
5 v_PSD.*
6 ,v_OTS.TotalRabatt
7 ,v_OTS.TotalBelop
8 ,v_OTS.TotalPris
9 ,v_OTS.TotalMVA
10 FROM
11 v_ProduktSalgDetaljer AS v_PSD
12 INNER JOIN
13 v_OrdreTotalSum AS v_OTS
14 ON
15 v_OTS.Ordre_ID = v_PSD.Ordre_ID
16 WHERE
17 v_PSD.Kunde_ID = @Kunde_ID
18 AND
19 v_PSD.Ordre_ID = @Ordre_ID
20
21 end
22
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 22, 2004
When working with databases containing myriad of huge tables, I am very much tempted to create categorized views on those tables in order to simplify and facilitate data query programming? Some developers I talk to say such views generally slow down query performance. Is this true?
Thanks.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 21, 2007
Hi,
I have come across this problem with SQL server both on 2000 and 2005. I am stating an example here.
I have two partitioned tables and a view on top of both tables as below:
create table [dbo].[Table_1]
(
[TableID] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED
CHECK NOT FOR REPLICATION ([TableID] BETWEEN 1 AND 999),
[AnyOtherColumn] int NOT NULL ,
) ON [Primary]
GO
create table [dbo].[Table_2]
(
[TableID] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED
CHECK NOT FOR REPLICATION ([TableID] BETWEEN 1000 AND 1999),
[AnyOtherColumn] int NOT NULL ,
) ON [Primary]
GO
create view TableView
as
select * from Table_1
union all
select * from Table_2
GO
Note the NOT FOR REPLICATION clause on the check constraint on the TableID column.
I then ran the query execution plan for the following query on both SQL server 2000 and 2005.
select * from TableView where TableID = 10
On both the versions the execution plan shows and Index seek on both the tables in the view. This means that my partitioning is not working. If I remove the primary key constraint from the TableID column, the same query on the view shows a table scan on all the underlying tables. This is even worse.
Next, create the same tables and views again, now without the NOT FOR REPLICATION clause on the check constraint as show below:
create table [dbo].[Table_1]
(
[TableID] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED
CHECK ([TableID] BETWEEN 1 AND 999),
[AnyOtherColumn] int NOT NULL ,
) ON [Primary]
GO
create table [dbo].[Table_2]
(
[TableID] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED
CHECK ([TableID] BETWEEN 1000 AND 1999),
[AnyOtherColumn] int NOT NULL ,
) ON [Primary]
GO
create view TableView
as
select * from Table_1
union all
select * from Table_2
GO
Now run the query execution plan for the same query again.
select * from TableView where TableID = 10
This time you would see that it does an index scan only on the first parititon table. This time it proves that the partitioning works.
I would like to know why does the NOT FOR REPLICATION clause in the check constraint make such a huge difference?
Is it a bug in SQL server?
Or am I missing any thing?
Any help appreciated.
Thanks
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 27, 2008
Hi, I am new to sql and I am trying to join 2 views using MySQL Query Browser. Here is my query and the issues I am having.
SELECT book_month, region_book, product_group as base_prod_group, cnt as base_cnt FROM collections.v_nonpay_trend_base a
join collections.v_nonpay_trend_npdata b
on (a.book_month=b.disc_check_in_month and a.region_book=b.region and a.base_prod_group=b.product_group)
Error - "Column 'product_group' in field list is ambiguous" and "Column 'cnt' in field list is ambiguous"
Both views have columns named 'product_group' and 'cnt'
Can someone please let me know what I am doing wrong?
Thanks!!
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 6, 2008
create view myidtitlenew
as
SELECT c1.messageid_,
c1.title_, c1.list_,
c1.created_
FROM outmail_ c1
inner join (Select max(messageid_) as messageid_, max(title_) as title_
FROM outmail_ c1 where list_ = 'copd'
GROUP BY substring([title_],1,charindex(' ',[title_])-1)
) c2
ON c1.messageid_ = c2.messageid_
go
create view mymembersum
as
select distinct list_, membertype_ , count(*) as cnt
from Members_ where list_='copd'
group by membertype_,list_
go
how could i join them?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Dec 4, 2006
Hi,
I have 2 views that I can join to give me the recordset I want. Both views are currently filtered on a particular column (ie 'WHERE colName = myValue')
The problem is that I want to use this from a web page with user input in which the user would specify myValue.
Is there any alternative to having two views? Can I combine them into one SQL statement? Access allowed me to do it by specifying an alias for a select statement, then joining this to another. I'm not sure if that makes sense, but I guess what I want to do it specify one view then another, then join them - all in the same statement!
Something like this:
Code:
SELECT view1.*, view2.*
FROM ((SELECT tbl1.*,tbl2.*,tbl3.*
FROM tbl1 JOIN tbl2 ON tbl1.id = tbl2.tbl1_id
JOIN tbl3 ON tbl2.id = tbl3.tbl2_id
AND tbl3.id = myValue) AS view1)
((SELECT tbl4.* FROM tbl4 WHERE tbl4.id = myValue) AS view2)
RIGHT JOIN view1 ON view2....
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 10, 2007
Hi guys,I detected a strange behaviour when doing an inner join of two views.There is table_Objects, table_Contracts and view_Objects, View_Contracts.Table_Objects: ID, PriceView_Objects: Select * from Table_Objects Where Price > 10Table_Contracts: ID, YearView_Contracts: Select c.ID, c.YearFrom Table_Contracts c Join View_Objects o on c.id=o.idQuiete simple so far, but it doesn't work. Imagine Object with id 3 that is shown in View_Objects and Table_Contracts but not shown in View_Contracts. How is that possible?EDIT: Sometimes its shown, sometimes notThx for your reply!
View 3 Replies
View Related
Sep 8, 2015
I am new to programming trying hard to learn. I made a code for Views in mssql for the 2 tables below:I am wondering if I could make it 3, 4 or more tables at the same time. How can incorporate in the following codes I made.
Create View vwEmployeeInfoByGender
as
Select FirstName, MiddleName, FamilyName, Gender, BirthDate,
MaritalStatus
from tblEmployeeInfo
join tblGender
on tblEmployeeInfo.GenderID
= tblGender.GenderID
View 26 Replies
View Related
Sep 9, 2003
In a simple join query, such as
SELECT *
FROM a, b
WHERE a.id = b.id
if table 'a' has 1 million and table 'b' has few thousands of records, will the order of the tables in from class will make any difference?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 19, 2007
I have two databses SIS and SIS_Pro. Users tables should be used in both of them because I have some relations between this table with other table in SIS and SIS_Pro. Users in SIS only have one column and it is the UserId which is the primary Key in both of them, but in SIS_Pro Users table have Firstname Lastname and... now. In my program I need some informatin from SIS and some from SIS_Pro so I create a view which is joining of forexample exam in SIS and Users in SIS_Parnian, becuase I don't have the firstname and lastname in a Users table which is in SIS_Pro databse.Does it reduce the performance?is it better to copy datas which are in Users in SIS to Users in SIS_Pro( I mean all columns firstname, lastname ,,.....)
Sincerely
Kianoosh
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 10, 2005
I'm currently using a system where the number of column in any given table is so great that the columns are often split into additonal tables. I know it's a wierd design but there you go. So I have to deal with tables looking like: MathResult, MathResult_2, MathResult_3, etcEach table is basically the same entity, i.e. it has the same number of rows and each row has the same key value as its peer tables. My question is that should I create a view to bring the tables together, given that a View doesn't seem to have any sort of row-size restriction? Normally I shy away from Views because I've always found them to bring performance down. Any thoughts?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 17, 2000
Hello everyone,
I want to use VIEWS to filter records using a stored procedure to call the VIEW. Will I get a performance boost from using a VIEW, or should I just use the SQL statement that I used to create the VIEW, in my SP and forget about calling a VIEW at all?
Thanks,
Nathan
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 27, 2014
I have a query which retrieves data from 4-5 tables. To restrict the acess directly to the tables, views have been created on all these tables. These views are just select * from the tables. Two of these 5 tables have 700 Million and 8 Million rows respectively. And all the tables are having indexes. My issue here is that my query on views take three times more then the duration it takes to retrive data directly from tables. e.g. To retrieve 1 Miliion rows, it takes just 7-10 minutes on tables but on views it takes more than 30 minutes. When I check the query plan for both the options, I can see that indexes are being picked up but still the views are very slow.
Creating indexes on views is not feasible option for me as it requires DDL changes and so much testing efforts.
View 14 Replies
View Related
May 30, 2008
Hi guys,
I'm have a table which is filled daily by a procedure. This procedure executes for around 2 hours.
Now i also want to create a clustered index view on this table.
Now during the time data is being inserted in this table, would the performance of server get hit.?
Since it think it would continiously be updating this view during this duration.
Is there a way i can temporarily disconnect the view?
Please advice.
Thanks.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jan 25, 2008
OK so I have this EAV system on a server that is old enough for kindergarten. Insanely enough, this company that makes more money than any of your gods can not buy me a new box.
Before you say "redesign", I need funding allocated for that. See my first statement.
Anywho, I have this page that touches the dreaded Value table and does a clustered index seek on it. Can't search faster than that, right? Well I am getting some funding for "performance tuning". I am wondering if maybe incorporating some clustered index views involving the value table and producing a smaller clustered index for it to seek may alleviate some of this. Any thoughts?
View 10 Replies
View Related
Jan 19, 2008
Dear All,
i've tried with indexed views, but because the view is referenceing another view, i was unable to create a clustered index on that view.
so please let me know how can i improve the performance of the view.
thank you very much
Vinod
Even you learn 1%, Learn it with 100% confidence.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 8, 2000
Hello Everybody,
I posted this same question couple of times in the news groups but no answers. I have a 2 tables and i am doing a union query using a view. each has 250 rows. The query takes 20 seconds to return the results. no joins or anything. the create view simply looks like this:
create view myview as
select id, name from table1
union
select id,name from table2
Where as if i write a stored procedure like below, it returns the rows in 4 seconds.
create table #mytable
( id int, name varchar(30))
insert into #mytable (id, name) select id, name from table1
insert into #mytable (id, name) select id, name from table2
select id,name from #mytable.
I prefer doing in the view since both returns the same result. I tried running dbcc, update statistics. but no luck. Can anyone please help me in this issue.
Thanks
Ramesh
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jul 23, 2005
I wonder if anyone has any hard fact based pro or contra, especially onperformance, about having views as opposed to tables when the object isbeing accessed for read only by multiple sessions/users/spids. I amparticularly concerned about the multiple instantiations of the view.Relevant thoughts on this are much appreciated.Thanks,Caveman
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 27, 2006
The code below is from a nested view, which I've read should be avoided. I've also noticed GETDATE() is used, which I believe causes GETDATE() to be executed for every record selected (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm also guessing a JOIN containing a UNION against a SELECT statement is not a good idea. What other problems do you notice?
SELECT trans.Entry_Code, trans.D_C, trans.ADP_Security_# ,
trans.TRID, trans.Batch_Code, trans.Last_Money,
null as Shares, Settle_date as Process_Date,
null as Closing_Price, trans.Dwnld_Date, trans.Acnt,
null as Mktval,
cast(Null as varchar(20)) as Cusip_#,
ACT.dbo.account.account_key AS account_key
FROM (SELECT * FROM ADPDBBOOK.dbo.YTD05B
WHERE (DATEDIFF(mm, Process_Date, GETDATE()) <= 15)
UNION
SELECT * FROM ADPDBBOOK.dbo.YTD06B) trans
INNER JOIN ACT_DATA.dbo.account
ON ACT_DATA.dbo.account.account_key = RIGHT(trans.Acnt, 5)
INNER JOIN tbl_Accounts_TransactionalData
ON trans.Acnt = tbl_Accounts_TransactionalData.Acnt
Thanks, Dave
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jun 23, 2006
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server with aparticular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return 100rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query in singleuser mode. So I tested the query on the Development server by taking abackup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the dev server. I ranthe same query and found that it ran in less than a second.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue is relatedto some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc. Or couldit be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQL Serverconfiguations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating system related issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 15, 2007
I know how to join 2 tables, but I have a third I need to insert. For some reason, this doesn't work:
Code:
$rows = ff_select(
"select ".
"u.email as email, ".
"c.user_id as user_id, ".
"u.name as name, ".
"r.age as age ".
"from #__comprofiler as c ".
"left join #__users as u on c.user_id = u.id ".
"left join #__rnr_contest as r on c.user_id = r.userid ".
"where (r.age != chicken) and (r.age != nystrip) and (r.age != regrets) and (u.block = 0) and (c.cb_contactmethod LIKE '%Email%') and (u.usertype != 'Super Administrator') and (u.email != 'please@change.com') and (u.username != 'guest') and (u.username != 'piedmont') ".
"order by email"
anyone see why? It tells me that "chicken" is not a column which is weird because I don't think it's listed as a column in my query... is it?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 11, 2007
Hi All,
First off sorry for my complete lack of experience with SQL, but I've just started a new position which involved learning SQL. I'm currently looking for a course but in the mean time I just have to try and fumble by doing basic things.
I'm trying to write my first basic select / join statement, and I just can't seem to get it working.
Any help would really be appreciated. It's T-SQL we use btw.
Thanks :)
USE MLSDHeat
GO
select * from dbo.CallLog
where callstatus between 'open'and 'pending'
right outer join dbo.Asgnmnt
on callid = callid
order by callid
--the above returns error Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 4
Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'right'.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 27, 2008
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.fn_copdmailinglist(@list_ varchar(60))
RETURNS @copdmailinglist TABLE
(
list_ varchar(60) ,
title_ varchar(255) ,
desc_ varchar(255),
message_id int ,
txt varchar(255) ,
cnt int ,
cnt_txt varchar(255)
)
--Returns a result set that lists all the copds
AS
BEGIN
WITH ListManager.dbo.[List Copd](list_ , title_ , message_id , txt , cnt , cnt_txt ) AS
(select @list_ , gmc.name_, osc.message_id , txt , cnt , cnt_txt from ListManager.dbo.[Open statisticscopd]('') osc
left outer join ListManager.dbo.get_mailingidcopd_('') gmc
on gmc.name_ = osc.title_
where list_ = @list_
)
-- copy the required columns to the result of the function
INSERT @copdmailinglist
SELECT list_ , title_ , message_id , txt , cnt , cnt_txt
FROM ListManager.dbo.[List Copd]
RETURN
END
GO
i m getting error that Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'WITH'.
can anyone tell me how to join functions in sql?
thanks.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jul 23, 2005
Select LOCGeneralHave.LSCH, LOCSubClassHave.LSCH from LOCGeneralHave ,LOCSubClassHave Where (LOCGeneralHave.LCNT <> '0' andLOCSubClassHave.LCNT = '0')This query seems to be ignoring the 'and' part of the clause.Basically I want select from table1, table2 where LCNT in table1 is not0 andLCNT in table2 is 0.I have verified the LCNT's numbersThis query returns 2 columns with 1700 rowsIt needs to only find a few rows.What am I missing, any ideas, thanks for any help.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 26, 2006
I am trying to join two fields in a query in SQL 2000. For example.
Update myTable SET field_1 = @field_1_value , field_2 = @field_2_value, field_3 = @field_1_value + ' x ' + field_2_value
Is this even possible.
I want the user to input values for fields 1 and 2, then in the background combine the two and insert that value in field 3.
Thanks in advance,
Scotty_C
View 7 Replies
View Related
Mar 19, 2015
I have four tables:
a, b, c and d
table a is related to table b by a foreign key. table b is related to c and so on.
I used the sql statement below to join the tables:
$result = mysql_query("SELECT a.colum1, a.column2,
b.column, c.column, d.column FROM a
JOIN b ON a.pkey = b.foreign key
JOIN c ON b.pkey = c.fkey
JOIN d ON c.pkey = d.fkey ")
or die(mysql_error());
[Code] .....
I succeeded in printing out the first record where the four tables are joined, but not other instances.my print out is this:
a.column1
a.colum2
b.colum
c.colum
d.colum
But there are about ten instances where the joining conditions are met. How do I print out all the records that have met the condition?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 20, 2005
Two tables:T1 (c1 int, TestVal numeric(18,2), ResultFactor numeric(18,2))--c1 isthe primary key.T2 (x1 int, FromVal numeric(18,2), ToVal numeric(18,2), Factornumeric(18,2))--x1 is the primary key. T2 contains non-overlappingvalues. So for eg., a few rows in T2 may look like.1, 51, 51.999, 512, 52, 52.999, 52........32, 82, 82.999, 82........T2 is basically a lookup table. There is no relationship between thetwo tables T1 and T2. However, if the TestVal from T1 falls in therange between FromVal and ToVal in T2, then I want to updateResultFactor in T1 with the corresponding value of Factor from the T2table.------Example for illustration only---------------Even though tables cannot be joined using keys, the above problem is avery common one in our everyday life. For example T1 could beemployees PayRaise table, c1=EmployeeID, with "TestVal" representingtest scores (from 1 to 100). T2 representing lookup of the ranges,with "Factor" representing percent raise to be given to the employee.If TestVal is 65 (employee scored 65% in a test), and a row in T2(FromVal=60, ToVal=70, Factor=12), then I would like to update 12 intable T1 from T2 using sql;. Basically T2 (like a global table)applies to all the employees, so EmpID cannot serve as a key in T2.---------------------------------------------------------Could anyone suggest how I would solve MY PROBLEM using sql? I wouldlike to avoid cursors and loops.Reply appreciated.Thanks
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 25, 2007
Sorry for the akward title, not sure how to say this. I have a Person table and a addresses table. Each person may have many address records as shown below:
Person
-----------
PersonID | AutoNum
fName | varchar
lName | varchar
...etc
Addresses
---------------
addressID | AutoNum
personID | int (FK)
address1 | varchar
city | varchar
state | varchar
isPrimary | bit
...etc
What I'm trying to do is select all from Person and the city and state of each person's primary address. A little voice keeps saying subquery...but I can't figure it out. So far I have the SQL below, but if there is no address or no address where isPrimary = 1, it fails to return the person record. I need the person record regardless of if they have a primary address. Does that make sense?
Doesn't return all Person records:
SELECT Person.*, Address.City, Address.State
FROM Person LEFT OUTER JOIN Address
ON Person.PersonID = Address.PersonID
WHERE (Address.isPrimary= 1)
ORDER BY Person.lName, Person.fName
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 5, 2006
I am having the following situation - there is a view that aggregates and computes some values and a table that I need the details from so I join them filtering on the primary key of the table. The execution plan shows that the view is executed without any filtering so it returns 140 000 rows which are later filtered by the join operation a hash table match. This hash table match takes 47% of the query cost. I tried selecting the same view but directly giving a where clause without the join €“ it gave a completely different execution plan. Using the second method is in at least 4 folds faster and is going only through Index Seeks and nested loops.
So I tried modifying the query with third version. It gave almost the same execution plan as the version 1 with the join operation.
It seams that by giving the where clause directly the execution plan chosen by the query optimizer is completely different €“ it filters the view and the results from it and returns it at the same time, in contrast to the first version where the view is executed and return and later filtered. Is it possible to change the query some how so that it filters the view before been joined to the table.
Any suggestions will be appreciated greatly
Stoil Pankov
"vHCItemLimitUsed" - this is the view
"tHCContractInsured" - this is the table
"ixHCContractInsuredID" - is the primary key of the table
Here is a simple representation of the effect:
Version 1:
select *
from dbo.vHCItemLimitUsed
inner join tHCContractInsured on
vHCItemLimitUsed.ixHCContractInsuredID = tHCContractInsured.ixHCContractInsuredID
where tHCContractInsured.ixHCContractInsuredID in (9012,9013,9014,9015)
Version 2:
select *
from vHCItemLimitUsed
where ixHCContractInsuredID in (9012,9013,9014,9015)
Version 3:
select *
from dbo.vHCItemLimitUsed
where ixHCContractInsuredID in
(select ixHCContractInsuredID
from tHCContractInsured
where ixHCContractInsuredID in (9012,9013,9014,9015))
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 17, 2008
In database DB1, I have table DB1.dbo.Suppliers1. This table has an ID column of type INT named SUPPL1_ID
In database DB2, I have table DB2.dbo.Suppliers2. This table has an ID column of type INT named SUPPL2_ID
I would like to update DB2.dbo.Suppliers2 based on values from DB1.dbo.Suppliers1 joining on SUPPL1_ID = SUPPL2_ID.
How can I do this in SSIS?
Assumptions:
linked servers are not an option, as I want the SSIS package to be portable and not dependent on server environments.
TIA.
-El Salsero
View 5 Replies
View Related
May 16, 2015
I am learning the Optimizer from the book "Querying Microsoft SQL Server 2012" for certificate exam 70-461. I really cannot understand how it explains the number of possible ways to execute a query joining three tables. the pseudo-query is:
SELECT A.col5, SUM(C.col6) AS col6sum
FROM TableA AS A
INNER JOIN TableB AS B
ON A.col1 = B.col1
INNER JOIN TableC AS C
ON B.col2 = c.col2
WHERE A.col3 = constant 1
AND B.col4 = constant2
GROUP BY A.col5;
The book says:"Start with the FROM part. Which tables should SQL Server join first, TableA and TableB or TableB and TableC? And in each join, which of the two tables joined should be the left and which one the right table? The number of all possibilities is six, if the two joins are evaluated linearly, one after another."
Q1: How could it be six possibilities? From my understanding, lets say, if the SQL Server has to join A and B first, and then join C, in this case I can think of 4 possibilities, which are:
1. When A Join B, Left: A, Right: B.
  When Join C, Left: result of A join B, Right: C
2. When A Join B, nbsp; Â
When Join C, nbsp;When A Join B, nbsp; Â
When Join C, nbsp;When A Join B, nbsp; Â Â
When Join C, "line-height:13.5px;">
Q2:Â The section following the previous question says there are 4 different types of join.."This already gives four options for each join. So far, there are 6 x 4 = 24 different options for only the FROM part of this query."
How can it be 6 x 4? My understanding is 4 is only for 1 join, but in our case, there are 2 joins, so it should be 6 x 4 x 4.
View 4 Replies
View Related
May 17, 2013
I'm joining several tables and when I add the last one I get duplicate results. How can I get just one for each?
select a.field, b.field, c.field
from atblname as a inner join btblname as b on a.id = b.parent_id
left outer join ctblname as c on a.id = c.parent_id
There are more than one result when joining tbl a and c, but I'm getting a reult for each of them for all results from joining a and b.
View 9 Replies
View Related
