T1 : Key as bigint, Data as char(20) - size: 61M records
T2 : Key as bigint, Data as char(20) - size: 5M records
T2 is the smaller, with 5 million records.
They both have clustered indexes on Key.
I want to do:
update T1 set Data = T2.Data
from T2
where T2.Key = T1.Key
The goal is to match Key values, and only update the data field of T1
if they match. SQL server seems to optimize this query fairly well,
doing an inner merge join on the Key fields, however, it then does a
Hash match to get the data fields and this is taking FOREVER. It
takes something like 40 mins to do the above query, where it seems to
me, the data could be updated much more efficiently. I would expect
to see just a merge and update, like I would see in the following
query:
update T1 set Data = [someconstantdata]
from T2
where T2.Key = T1.Key and T2.Data = [someconstantdata]
The above works VERY quickly, and if I were to perform the above query
5 mil times(assuming that my data is completely unique in T2 and I
would need to) it would finish very quickly, much sooner than the
previous query. Why won't SQL server just match these up while it is
merging the data and update in one step? Can I make it do this? If I
extracted the data in sorted order into a flat file, I could write a
program in ten minutes to merge the two tables, and update in one
step, and it would fly through this, but I imagine that SQL server is
capable of doing it, and I am just missing it.
I have the following statement that takes quite a long time. Longestof any of my SQL statment updates.UPDATE F_REGISTRATION_STD_SESSIONSET PREVIOUS_YEAR_SESSION_ID = (SELECT s.previous_year_session_idFROM F_REGISTRATION_STD_SESSION R,DS_V4_TARGET.dbo.D_H_Session_By_SessQtr SWHEREr.STUDENT_ID = F_REGISTRATION_STD_SESSION.STUDENT_IDand s.previous_year_SESSION_ID = r.SESSION_IDand s.session_id = F_REGISTRATION_STD_SESSION.SESSION_ID)STUDENT_ID varchar(20) and SESSION_ID char(10) and are indexedWhat I want to accomplish:I want to know if there was a student registration from the prior yearof a registration.Example, if there is a registration for Fall 2004, was there also aregistration for the same student Fall 2003?Maybe there is a better way to approach this?TIARob
I have a linked server set up on my local SQL 2000 instance. I try and run an update against an SQL 2005 database and it take 29 seconds. I checked the execution plan and it says it takes the entire time on the Remote Scan. Is there something I need to do to speed this up? There is an index on the PK that I am searching against.
Hi, I am using SQL2K for a intranet web application database. And I have several database in it. After a long periode of time (about 6 month) the the application is slowing down when accessing the data. I use full log for the database. I also set an autobackup for the database for every 15 minute, but I think this is not what cause the slow down. The database seem to slow down more and more every day. I keep only the last 3 days transaction data and every day I delete transaction data older then 4 day, so the number of records in the transaction table is just about 3000 to 5000 records only. Please help me. Thanks.
Hi, We have a server that s too slow. The tables have about between 1 million and 3 million records each. We have about 30 tables for production. The other tables are mostly look up tables (just for personnel and categories and so on, only static tables)
1/ do u guys think that s too much data, I mean about 3 millions records in a table. Because the manager said, may be if u archive some records and delete them from the tables, the system might become quick and performant?
2/ When we check the activity monitor in management in entreprise manager, we find a process Id 55 that has the value 1 in the Blocking column, and other processes having that process ID 55 in the Blocked by column. Does the fact that the blocking column for a process equals 1 mean that the process is having a problem, and how do we know what causes the problem for sure?
3/When we check Performance monitor, pls note that we have RAID5 with 5 disks, we see that Avg. Disk Queue Length counter ranging between 20 and 70 and especially if we run a query for example, although simple select query in one of the tables, the Avg. Disk Queue Length counter goes to the roof to 100 % in performance monitor.
I don t think we have a pb with the CPU, it looks good, not going to the roof.
For your info, we have the web server on that same SQL server machine as well, but the web server s working well, only sql server and the client application that accesses it is slow, the web pages are pretty fast.
Am I following the good path to diagnose what s wrong. It s my first time doing this, and I am trying to learn.
Hello , I'm a newbie,I programmed a store procedure,and when it runs in query analyzer, I get results very fast,but when I add it in a job,then this job run very very slow, (I add records and delete records in the SP), WHY?
I'm using a SQL Server 2000 with a dozen of databases. The databases are rather small (all sizes together sum up to 10 GB).
The entire server gets extremelly slow from time to time (lasting a few days when it happens and suddently coming back to normality). A profiler trace doesn't show anything strange (besides a lot of SQL Agent entries).
I pretty much tried to isolate every single application that makes use of the databases in that server and see if it was the cause of the problem, but I couldn't find any correlation.
I know the computer where this server runs is quite fragmented. Is there anyway I could get to know if this is the cause of my performance issues?
I don't know if this happens, but once the server simply went down for some 3 hours, and I wasn't able to bring it up in anyway. It eventually started working again by itself. The only thing I did in the meantime was to run DBCC CHECKDB a few times, always getting the response "No error found on the database".
Hi everybody !!! I have a problem with database SQL server 2000, and I need anyone help me.
I have PC machine with hardware configuration following:
+ RAM : 512M
+ CPU : 2.4 GHz (intel Pentium 4)
+ System : Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprice Edition , Service Pack 1
(this is call Machine1 )
and other Server machine with hardware configuration the following :
+ RAM : 2G
+ CPU : 3.6 GHz( intel Xeon)
+System : Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprice Edition , Service Pack 2
(use RAID 5)
(this is call Machine2 )
.And SQL Server 2000 is installed in these machine.
I created one table and one script to insert several records into this table. and script for inserting:
declare @count int , @max int
set @count =1
set @max = 5000
WHILE (@count < @max or @count = @max)
BEGIN
insert into TBAT_STOCKEOD(TRDT,SEQNO,COMPID,TRANSTYPE) values('20071219',cast(@count as varchar(5)),'13215','1')
set @count = @count +1
END
I execute this script on Machine1 and Machine2 :
+ Machine1 : spent 3 seconds.
+ Machine2 : spent 30 seconds. I don't understand why Machine2 is slower than Machine1 ( while configuration of Machine2 is better than Machine1's ). I don't know what happen.
I checked resource usages in perfmon when SQL server execute script and result following :
Machine1:
Proccessor used 100%
whereas,Machine2 used physical Disk 100%
Is there the way to configurate SQL server to improve speed writting of hard disk?
Hi All,I have a table that currently contains approx. 8 million records.I'm running a SELECT query against this table that in somecircumstances is either very quick (ie results returned in QueryAnalyzer almost instantaneously), or very slow (ie 30 to 40 seconds toreturn results), and I'm trying to work out how I improve performance.Essentially the query I'm running is nothing more complex than:SELECT TOP 1 * FROM Table1 WHERE tier=n ORDER BY member_id[tier] is a smallint column with a non-clustered, non-unique index onit. [member_id] is a numeric column with a clustered, unique index onit.When I supply a [tier] value of 1, it returns results instantaneously.I have no idea if this is meaningful, but the tier = 1 records wereloaded first into the table, and comprise approximately 5 millionrecords.When I supply a [tier] value of 2, the results take 30 to 40 seconds.tier =2 records were loaded second, and comprise approximately 3million records.I've tried running an execution plan, and while I'm no expert, itappears to me that the index on tier isn't being used, even if I use:tier = CAST(2 as SMALLINT)I'm wondering if anyone can give me ANY advice on how to get anybetter performance out of this SELECT statement?Also, out of curiosity, can a disk defragment have a positive impacton SELECT query performance?Any help very much appreciated!Much warmth,Murray
In an ASP, I have a dynamically created SQL statement that amounts to "SELECT * FROM Server1.myDB.dbo.myTable WHERE Col1 = 1" (Col1 is the table's primary key). It returns the data immediately when executed.
However, when the same record is updated with "UPDATE Server1.myDB.dbo.myTable SET Comments = 'blah blah blah' WHERE Col1 = 1", the page times out before the query can complete.
I watched the program in Profiler, and I saw on the update that sp_cursorfetch was being executed as an RPC once per each row in the table. In a table of 78000 records, the timeout occurs well before the last record is fetched, and the update bombs.
I can run the same statements in Query Analyzer from a linked server and have the same results. The execution plan shows that a Remote Query is occurring on the select that returns 1 row, and a Remote Scan is taking place on the update scanning 78000 rows (I guess this is where all the sp_cursorfetch calls are happening...?).
How can I prevent the Remote Scan? How can I prevent the execution of the RPC sp_cursorfetch for each row in the remote table?
I have had a problem with Enterprise Manager connecting to SQL Server. At first this problem was experienced with one particular network user... whichever PC he logged onto, Enterprise Manager took ages to connect to SQL Server and every operation was painfully slow. Creating a new Windows NT logon fixed the problem.
I now have this same problem but only on my PC. It doesn't matter which Windows NT logon I use, using Enterprise Manager is painfully slow. I've tried creating a new Windows NT profile, checking the hard drive for errors, defragmenting the disk, reinstalling Enterprise Manager etc but nothing works.
What is strange is that connections from VB applications on my PC are fast. It is only Enterprise Manager that is slow.
I am using the latest service pack for SQL Server.
I thought it could be a problem with the Enterprise Manager registry values but don't want to start messing with them!
Has anyone else experienced this problem? Any advice would be great as I can't find any help from microsoft other than installing the latest service pack for SQL Server.
I have a problem with bad perfomance with my import of data from a SQL Server 2000 database. I use an OLEDB datasource in my SSIS package to connect to the sql server 2000 database. My 2005 server runs 64bits but i dont think this is an issue. With this configuration the import is VERY slow, we are talking about 40+ minutes to get 3.5 million rows with about 20 columns. When i create a test DTS package on the SQL Server 2000 server itself and run it, its blazingly fast. Has anyone run into something similar?
I was wondering if someone can point out the error or the thing I shouldn't be doing in a stored procedure on SQL Server 2005. I want to switch from SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2005 which all seems to work just fine, but one stored procedure is causing me headache.
I could pin the problem down to this query:
DECLARE @Package_ID bigint
DECLARE @Email varchar(80)
DECLARE @Customer_ID bigint
DECLARE @Payment_Type tinyint
DECLARE @Payment_Status tinyint
DECLARE @Booking_Type tinyint
SELECT @Package_ID = NULL
SELECT @Email = NULL
SELECT @Customer_ID = NULL
SELECT @Payment_Type = NULL
SELECT @Payment_Status = NULL
SELECT @Booking_Type = NULL
CREATE TABLE #TempTable(
PACKAGE_ID bigint,
PRIMARY KEY (PACKAGE_ID))
INSERT INTO
#TempTable
SELECT
PACKAGE.PACKAGE_ID
FROM
PACKAGE (nolock) LEFT JOIN BOOKING ON PACKAGE.PACKAGE_ID = BOOKING.PACKAGE_ID
LEFT JOIN CUSTOMER (nolock) ON PACKAGE.CUSTOMER_ID = CUSTOMER.CUSTOMER_ID
LEFT JOIN ADDRESS_LINK (nolock) ON ADDRESS_LINK.SOURCE_TYPE = 1 AND ADDRESS_LINK.SOURCE_ID = CUSTOMER.CUSTOMER_ID
LEFT JOIN ADDRESS (nolock) ON ADDRESS_LINK.ADDRESS_ID = ADDRESS.ADDRESS_ID
AND PACKAGE.CUSTOMER_ID = ISNULL(@Customer_ID,PACKAGE.CUSTOMER_ID)
AND PACKAGE.PAYMENT_TYPE = ISNULL(@Payment_Type,PACKAGE.PAYMENT_TYPE)
AND PACKAGE.PAYMENT_STATUS = ISNULL(@Payment_Status,PACKAGE.PAYMENT_STATUS)
AND BOOKING.BOOKING_TYPE = ISNULL(@Booking_Type,BOOKING.BOOKING_TYPE)
-- If this line below is included the request will take about 90 seconds whereas it takes 1 second if it is outcommented
--AND ADDRESS.EMAIl LIKE '%' + ISNULL(@Email, ADDRESS.EMAIL) + '%'
GROUP BY
PACKAGE.PACKAGE_ID
DROP TABLE #TempTable
The request is performing quite well on the SQL Server 2000 but on the SQL Server 2005 it takes much longer. I already installed the SP2 x64, I'm running the SQL Server 2005 on a x64 environment. As I stated in the comment in the query it takes 90 seconds to finish with the line included, but if I exclude the line it takes 1 second. I think there must be something wrong with the join's or something else which has maybe changed in SQL Server 2005. All the tables joined have a primary key. Maybe you folks can spot the error / mistake / wrong type of doing things easily. I would appreciate any help you can offer me to solve this problem.
On the web I saw that there is a Cumulative Update 4 for the SP2 which fixes the following:
942659 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/942659/) FIX: The query performance is slower when you run the query in SQL Server 2005 than when you run the query in SQL Server 2000
Anyhow I think the problem is something else, I haven't tried out the cumulative update yet, as I think it is something different, more general why this query takes ages to process.
An SSIS package to transfer data from a DB instance on SQL Server 2005 to SQL Server 2000 is extremely slow. The package uses an OLEDB Source to OLEDB Destination for data transfer which is basically one table from sql server 2005 to sql server 2000. The job takes 5 minutes to transfer about 400 rows at night when there is very little activity on the server. During the day the job almost always times out.
On SQL Server 200 instances the job ran in minutes in the old 2000 package.
Is there an alternative to this. Tranfer Objects task does not work as there is apparently a defect according to Microsoft. Please let me know if there is any other option other than using a Execute 2000 package task or using an ActiveX Script to read records from one source and to insert them into the destination source, which I am not certain how long it might take and how viable will that be?
I am using two almost idential laptops, one with XP and one with Vista, the only differences is that the XP laptop has 1G of RAM and running Office XP and the Vista has 2G RAM and is running Office 2007.
I have a MS Access database that has linked tables to a SQL Server 2000 database. The performance of the Access database on Vista is 5-10 times slower on the Vista machine. Just flipping through records or opening forms can take 5 - 15 seconds on the Vista machine while the XP machine takes 1 sec or less.
What gives? I looked at the CPU performance and the network performance while the Access database was busy flipping through records, the network traffic was < 2% and the CPU would spike to 40% on one of the CPUs (dual core) but would remain under 5% most of the time.
I also previously had Office XP installed on the Vista machine and it had the same performance issue so bought and install Office 2007 on the Vista machine and it did not solve the problem.
It seems that Vista is doing something that is slowing down Access with linked tables. Is this a issue between Vista and using an ODBC connection to SQL Server?
I am hoping someone can shed light on this odd behavior I am seeing running a simple UPDATE statement on a table in SQL Server 2000. I have 2 tables - call them Table1 and Table2 for now (among many) that need to have certain columns updated as part of a single transaction process. Each of the tables has many columns. I have purposely limited the target column for updating to only ONE of the columns in trying to isolate the issue. In one case the UPDATE runs fine against Table1... at runtime in code and as a manual query when run in QueryAnalyzer or in the Query window of SSManagementStudio - either way it works fine. However, when I run the UPDATE statement against Table2 - at runtime I get rowsaffected = 0 which of course forces the code to throw an Exception (logically). When I take out the SQL stmt and run it manually in Query Analyzer, it runs BUT this is the output seen in the results pane... (0 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) How does on get 2 answers for one query like this...I have never seen such behavior and it is a real frustration ... makes no sense. There is only ONE row in the table that contains the key field passed in and it is the same key field value on the other table Table1 where the SQL returns only ONE message (the one you expect) (1 row(s) affected) If anyone has any ideas where to look next, I'd appreciate it. Thanks
I hav the following problem. I have written an stored procedure in sql server 2000 as the following CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.pa_rellena @pFechaInicio datetime
AS declare @pFechaFin datetime declare @auxcod_cen char(10)
--Borramos las tablas temporales si las hemos creado con anterioridad y no se han borrado if object_id('tmpCentros') is not null drop table tmpCentros
if object_id('tmpCentros2') is not null drop table tmpCentros2
if object_id('tmpMaxCajas') is not null drop table tmpMaxCajas
if object_id('tmpCajasCentro') is not null drop table tmpCajasCentro
if object_id('tmpVales') is not null drop table tmpVales
if object_id('tmpDiarioEfectivo') is not null drop table tmpDiarioEfectivo
if object_id('tmpDiarioTalones') is not null drop table tmpDiarioTalones
if object_id('tmpDiarioTarjetas') is not null drop table tmpDiarioTarjetas
if object_id('tmpDiarioSegundaForma') is not null drop table tmpDiarioSegundaForma
if object_id('tmpDiarioGastosTarjetas') is not null drop table tmpDiarioGastosTarjetas
if object_id('temp1') is not null drop table temp1
--Seleccionamos todos los centros de Salvador Bachiller select * into tmpCentros2 from centros where centros.tienda=1 order by cod_cen
--Seleccionamos el maximo de cajas por cada centro
select cod_cen, max(cod_caja) as cajas into tmpMaxCajas from cierrecaja where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin group by cod_cen order by cod_cen
--Mezclamos los centros con el maximo de cajas select c.cod_cen, c.Centro, c.Direccion, c.localidad, c.provincia, c.cpostal, c.telefono, m.cajas, operaciones, cajas_tot, tienda, franquicia into tmpCentros from tmpCentros2 as c left outer join tmpMaxCajas as m on c.cod_cen=m.cod_cen
--Cajas por centro select distinct cod_cen as cod_cen, cod_caja as cod_caja into tmpCajasCentro from cierrecaja where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin
--Los vales de cada centro select cod_cen,sum(importe) as imp1 into tmpVales from vales where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin group by cod_cen
--Efectivo de cada centro select cod_cen,'01' as vendedor,'EFECTIVO' as descripcion, (sum(diario.TotEuro)-Sum(Diario.Imppa2)) as importe1,0 as exp1, (sum(Diario.TotEuro)-sum(Diario.imppa2)) as importe2 into tmpDiarioEfectivo from diario where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin and cod_cen in (select cod_cen from tmpCentros) and cod_caja in (select cod_caja from tmpCajasCentro) and diario.cod_pago='01' group by cod_cen
--Talones por centro select centros.cod_cen,'02' as vendedor,'TALONES' as descripcion, sum(diario.TotEuro) as importe1,0 as exp1, sum(Diario.TotEuro) as importe2 into tmpDiarioTalones from centros inner join diario on centros.cod_cen=diario.cod_cen where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin and diario.cod_cen in (select cod_cen from tmpCentros) and cod_caja in (select cod_caja from tmpCajasCentro) and diario.cod_pago='02' group by centros.cod_cen
--Tarjetas por centro select cod_cen,'03' as vendedor,'TARJETAS' as descripcion, sum(diario.TotEuro) as importe1,0 as exp1, sum(Diario.TotEuro*(FPago.Descuento/100)) as importe2, sum(Diario.TotEuro) - sum(Diario.TotEuro*(FPago.Descuento/100)) as importe3 into tmpDiarioTarjetas from FPago left join Diario on fpago.Cod_pago=Diario.cod_pago where fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin and cod_cen in (select cod_cen from tmpCentros) and cod_caja in (select cod_caja from tmpCajasCentro) and Fpago.Descuento<>0 group by cod_cen
--Segunda Froma de Pago select cod_cen,'03' as vendedor,'TARJETAS' as descripcion,sum(diario.imppa2) as importe1 into tmpDiarioSegundaForma from fpago left join Diario on Fpago.cod_pago=diario.cod_pa1 where fPago.cod_pago<>'99' and fecha>=@pfechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin and cod_cen in (select cod_cen from tmpCentros) and cod_caja in (select cod_caja from tmpCajasCentro) and Fpago.Descuento<>0 group by cod_cen
--Comisiones tarjetas de pago select cod_cen,'10' as vendedor, 'GASTOS (-)' as descripcion, sum(Diario.imppa2*(fPago.Descuento/100)) as importe2 into tmpDiarioGastosTarjetas from Fpago left join Diario on FPago.cod_pago= Diario.cod_pa1 where fPago.cod_pago<>'99' and fecha>=@pFechaInicio and fecha<@pFechaFin and cod_cen in (select cod_cen from tmpCentros) and cod_caja in (select cod_caja from tmpCajasCentro) and Fpago.Descuento<>0 group by cod_cen /* --Venta neta por centro declare cursortemporal cursor for select cod_cen from TmpCentros2
open cursortemporal delete detallecaja_aux fetch next from cursortemporal into @auxcod_cen while @@fetch_status=0 Begin select @importeVales=imp1 from tmpVales where cod_cen=@auxcod_Cen select @importeEfectivo=importe2 from tmpDiarioEfectivo where cod_cen=@auxcod_Cen select @importeTalones=importe2 from tmpDiarioTalones where cod_cen=@auxcod_cen select @importeTarjetas1=importe3 from tmpDiarioTarjetas where cod_cen=@auxcod_cen select @importeTarjetas2=importe1 from tmpDiarioSegundaForma where cod_cen=@auxcod_cen select @importeGastos=importe2 from tmpDiarioGastosTarjetas where cod_cen=@auxcod_cen
insert into detallecaja_aux (cod_cen,importe1) values(@auxcod_cen, @importeVales+@importeEfectivo+@ImporteTalones+@ImporteTarjetas1+@importeTarjetas2-@importeGastos) fetch next from cursortemporal into @auxcod_cen
UPDATE TABLE SET FIELD1=NULL WHERE FIELD2=something - is running veryvery slow. Table has 200 000 recors and on FIELD2 is index. If number of records to be updated is about 40 000, it takes about 3-4 hours.
I tried this: - create a new MSSQL DB. - migration of TABLE from original databes to new test DB - So, in new DB was only one table, with 200 000 records. Index was only on FIELD2. - I ran that update and it takes about 3-4 hours
I tried that on Interbase and update takes under ONE SECOND!!!!!!!
I have the following stored procedure that I use for an update. The table now has just over two million rows and the stored procedure takes days to run. I am looking for any help that would produce the same results faster. This runs on SQL Server 6.5, on an NT machine with 4 pentium pro 200 processors and 512 MB of RAM so I am relatively sure that the performance issue is in the below statement.
UPDATE PAY_CHECK_DETAILS SET JobID = j.JobID ,HROrganizationID = j.HROrganizationID ,JobDetailID = j.JobDetailID ,GLAccountNumber = j.GLAccountNumber FROM JOBS j, PAY_CHECK_DETAILS p WHERE j.EmployeeID = p.EmployeeID AND j.HRActionEffectiveDate = (SELECT max(HRActionEffectiveDate) FROM JOBS jj WHERE p.EmployeeID = jj.EmployeeID AND jj.HRActionEffectiveDate <= p.PayDate)
AND j.HRActionSequence = (SELECT max(HRActionSequence) FROM JOBS jjj WHERE p.EmployeeID = jjj.EmployeeID AND jjj.HRActionEffectiveDate = (SELECT max(HRActionEffectiveDate) FROM JOBS jjjj WHERE p.EmployeeID = jjjj.EmployeeID AND jjjj.HRActionEffectiveDate <= p.PayDate)) AND NOT (ISNULL(p.JobID,1) = ISNULL(j.JobID,1) AND ISNULL(p.HROrganizationID,'A') = ISNULL(j.HROrganizationID,'A') AND ISNULL(p.JobDetailID,1) = ISNULL(j.JobDetailID,1) AND ISNULL(p.GLAccountNumber,'A') = ISNULL(j.GLAccountNumber,'A'))
Thanks for any help or suggestions you have. Keith
I have designed a 22 table database in sql server that is to act as a backup/alternate access to the data we have stored in an ADABAS database. I've also written a vb.net console program that will take data from ADABAS through a broker connection (one row at a time), checks the sql server database to see if that information is already stored, and then either performs an insert or an update.
I can write the rows from ADABAS to a text file (not using the broker), at the rate of about 1.3 million rows in 1.3 hours. Data can be imported (I'm not sure how this import is done, possibly via a CSV file. SELECTS/UPDATES are not done, just INSERTS) at about 1 million or so an hour. But when I do the update, receiving information via the broker from ADABAS to the VB program (with it's SELECT, then UPDATE/INSERT), I'm only doing about 20-25 thousand rows an hour.
I ran a trace using the SQL Server Analyzer on the database while running the update program, and then ran Profiler using the generated workload. It created a few indices, but I just restarted the update program (I'm still developing, so I delete all rows from all tables each time I rerun the update), but I haven't seen that it's really any faster.
I have a rather large set of data to transfer over, and this 20-25 thousand row time is not nearly fast enough.
I have a table with 110 nvarchar (255) columns in the database. I receive the data from the server (array) and them loop through it to insert the data into the database. The problem is it takes more than 3 minutes to insert (or update) (in memory) the 310 records it got from the array. I am reusing the Statement (with parameters). How could I improve the performance?
It's really a small quantity of data, the CPU in the device is 520Mhz... it should be alright!
I'm having what you might call an optimisation issue - but I'm also not sure if my approach to this problem is right. I've spent the whole day trying various methods but none seem to be performing as admirably as I'd hoped.
Basically, here's the scenario:
1. Log files are being inserted into a SQL table via Log Parser 2.2. 2. I have a lookup table of ip address ranges to countries and other geographic data. 3. Once the log row has been inserted from Log Parser, I want to update the same log table with data from the lookup table.
The main problem seems to be the updating (the initial insert from Log Parser is lightning quick).
I initially wrote a trigger on AFTER INSERT on the log table that converted the actual user's IP address into IPNumber format using a simple algorithm, then pumped the IPNumber into a quick select query which retrieved the geolocation data. Then, in the same trigger, there was an update statement which basically said:
update dbo.Logs set [Country] = @Country where [IpNumber] = @IpNumber and [Country] = Null
Therein lies the problem. The update statement slows everything down to almost a standstill and also seems to obtain a lock on the table.
Critical factors:
1. The log table must remain readable. 2. The query must execute in seconds -- not over half hour :)
I've experimented with various combinations of indexing, so far to no avail.
I am trying to update my table Members in my SQL server database "Portfolio".
When I click the button, It throws an exception with the following message: "String or binary data would be truncated. The statement has been terminated."
The following basic UPDATE SQL statement has been running for 16 hours and counting. I need to get this done ASAP.
UPDATE Recipients SET UndeliverableTime = getdate() FROM Recipients INNER JOIN Domains ON (Recipients.DomainID = Domains.ID) INNER JOIN Undeliverables ON ( Recipients.UserName + '@' + Domains.Domain = Undeliverables.EmailAddress)
Is there any way I can see how far this has gone and how long it will take to finish? Will this take another hour to finish or another week?
Both tables (Recipients and Undeliverables) have approximately 80 million records
I did a nearly identical operation with another table that had only 7 million records and it took 10.5 hours. I hope this doesn't scale linearly to 115 hours.
I am tempted to cancel, retune, and rerun but that may be trigger a really expensive rollback operation that could take days. Any ideas?
am using FOR UPDATE triggers to audit a table that has 67 fields. Myproblem is that this slows down the system significantly. I havenarrowed down the problem to the size (Lines of code) that need to becompiled after the trigger has been fired. There is about 67 IFUpdate(fieldName) inside the trigger and a not very complex selectstatement inside the if followed by an insert to the audit table. WhenI leave only a few IF-s in the trigger and comment the rest of thecode performance increased dramatically. It seems like it is checkingevery single UPdate() statement. Assuming that this was slowing downdue to doing a select for every update i tried to do to seperateselects in the beginning from Deleted and Inserted and assigningcolumns name to specific variables and instead of doingif Update(fieldName) i didif @DelFieldName <> @InsFieldNamebeginINSERT INTO AUDITSELECT WHAT I NEEDENDThis did not improve performance. If you have any ideas on how to getaround this issue please let me know.Below is an example of what my triggers look like.------------------------------------Trigger 1 -- this was my original designCREATE trigger1 on TableFOR UPDATEASif update(field1)begininsert into AuditSELECT What I needENDif update(field2)begininsert into AuditSELECT What I needEND...... Repeated about 65 more timesif update(field67)insert into AuditSELECT What I needEND---------------------------------------------------------------------------Trigger 2 -- this is what i tried but did not improve performanceCREATE trigger2 on TableFOR UPDATEASDeclare @DelField1 varcharDeclare @DelField2 varchar....Declare @DelField67 varcharSelect@DelField1 = Field1,@DelField2 = Field2,....@DelField67 = Field67From DeletedDeclare @InsField1 varcharDeclare @InsField2 varchar....Declare @InsField67 varcharSelect@insField1 = Field1,@insField2 = Field2,....@InsField67 = Field67From Inserted-- I do not do if Update() but instead compare variablesif @DelField1 <> InsField1beginInsert into AUDITSELECT what I needendif @DelField2 <> InsField2beginInsert into AUDITSELECT what I needend............if @DelField67 <> InsField67beginInsert into AUDITSELECT what I needend----------------------------------------------IF you have any idea how to optimize this please let me know. Anyinput is greatly appreciated. I do not have a problem with triggersdoing what they are supposed to, they are very slow this is myconcern. The reason I gave you two examples is because i suspect ithas something to do with the enormouse amount of code inside thetrigger. both examples perform about the same whether i use the twohuge selects from the Inserted and Deleted or not.Thanks,Gent
we just moved a database from a shared SQL 2000 server to SQLExpress on a VPS server. Every thing seems to work great, really no performance loss at all, except for one stored proc that is giving us problems. It's function is to update a history table, and then update the production table. On the old server, it would take less than a second to run this, now it takes anywhere from 45 seconds to 1 minute or it times out. This database is used on a classic asp web app. ANY help at all on this would be appreciated as I am pulling my hair out trying to figure out what's wrong here. here is the proc.
------------------------------------------ code ---------------------------------------------- set ANSI_NULLS ON set QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON SET NOCOUNT ON go
On 1 pc i installed VS2008 besides VS2005 and SQL 2005 (before i installed VS2008 everything was fine)
On the other is a fresh installed XP machine with only VS2008 SQL2550 and Office2007 Latets service packs are installed
On both machines when i open a table in SQL 2005 with the 'open table' command the show of the table is very slow. Every row is updated file by field, the grid is not showing, the row and column headers are not 'grey' as normal.
Scrollign is impossible as the screen updates start again that slow.
Even a small table with 10 rows and 15 field behaves this slow. Its not workable.
Hi Iam trying to do a trigger that everytime I Update a record de date get update too I finally find a trigger close to that, but this trigger update all the dates from all the record of the same table I wonder is there are a way that I can do it by the date of the record, if somebody could help I will really appreciate.
Thi is the trigger that I have so far
Create Trigger Update_Date on DBO.Company After Update as Update dbo.Company Set ActualiizationDate=Getdate() go
I have two tables in an inner join. I'm detailing the tables with some of their fields below. These tables are in a database I'm creating to manage backup tapes. Most importantly, this database will inform me when backup tapes which have already been used can be recycled (e.g. after all the jobs on the tape are over 28 days old). I want to write something which will look at each tape in turn and, if all related backup jobs on that tape are aged, the tape status will be changed from Active to Spare.
Tapes --TapeNo --Status (Spare / Assigned)
Jobs --JobNo --Name --Description --TapeNo --AgedJob (BIT field indicating whether or not the job has aged)
Each tape can have 0, 1 or many jobs and each job can be on more than one tape.
Anyway, I have the tables and relationsips set up and they're ok. Again, what I'm struggling with is how I take each tape and look at all its jobs and, if all have aged, change the Status for the tape to Spare. I'm using SQL Server 2000 (Access 2003 as front end) and am pretty new to SQL. I was thinking this could be done by using some kind of update query and subquery, but I'm stumped. Could someone please help ?
I have a trigger for column eISBNEnteredDate on update or insert changes of eISBN of the table Products2 ( both belong to the same table). The column eISBNEnteredDate can either be added manually along with eISBN value or when only eISBN value is entered it is updated with present date.
The problem I am facing is when I send eISBN along with eISBNEnteredDate the present date is what is getting saved. Upon the same record when a new date is updated the new date is getting saved. Can someone tell me where I am going wrong?
Here is my trigger:
Code Block ALTER TRIGGER [dbo].[Products2_eISBNEnteredDate] ON [dbo].[Products2] For Insert, Update As Begin Declare @ProductId int Declare @eISBN Varchar(17) Set @eISBN = '0' If ( Update(eISBN) ) Begin Select @Productid = I.Productid,@eISBN = I.eISBN From Inserted I Left Join Deleted d on I.Productid = D.Productid Left join Products2 P on P.Productid = I.Productid Where (ISNULL(I.eISBN,'') <> ISNULL(D.eISBN,''))
If (IsNull(@eISBN,'') <> '' and IsNull(@eISBN,'') <> '0') Begin Update Products2 Set eISBNEnteredDate = getdate() Where ProductID in (select i.ProductID From Inserted i Left join Deleted d on d.ProductID = i.ProductID Where (i.eISBN is not null or replace(i.eISBN,' ','') != '') --where the new eISBN is not null or blank and (d.eISBN is null or replace(d.eISBN,' ','') = '') --where the old eISBN is null or blank and isnull(i.eISBN,'') != isnull(d.eISBN,'') --where the new eISBN is not equal to the old ISBN13 and d.eISBNEnteredDate is null) End If IsNull(@eISBN,'') = '' and IsNull(@eISBN,'') = '' Begin Update Products2 set eISBNEnteredDate = NULL Where ProductID = @Productid End End End
Hello.I test some query on sql server 2000 (sp2 on OS windows 2000) and iwant to know why a simple query like this :select * from Table Where Column like '%value'is more slow on 2000 than on sql 7.And this case arrive only if the % character is in the begin.If you test this :select * from Table Where Column like 'v%alue'then it's more fast on 2000.I look the execution plan, there is a difference but this differenceis the same in all the case i test (for the two query i write in thismessage for example).I don't understand why and so, if someone have an explanation, andperhaps a solution ...Excuse my poor english language.And thanks for time people spend to answer me.
