Hello Everyone,
Does anyone know if there is a performance difference between the new WITH clause t-sql and the subquery?
On a basic functionality level, they seem to perform the same function but I was wondering if there are any performance difference between the 2?
Thanks,
Joseph
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[LOG]([TYPE] [smallint] NULL ,[TIME_STAMP] [datetime],[ID] [varchar] (44))ID is non-unique. I want to select all IDs where the last entry forthat ID is of type 11.Below is the query that I used. Notice that the subquery used is anested (not correlated) subquery meaning that it doesn't use resultsof outer query. This subquery should only be executed once. However,on large number of rows (3 million), this query never returns.I have also attempted to run subquery separately. That takes 1 minute.Then I put the results in temp table and joined that temp table withthe main query. That takes about 2 minutes.Unfortunately, that solution is unacceptable to us since we have tosupport both MSSQL and Oracle with the same queries, and the syntaxfor temp tables or table variables is different in Oracle.Mysterious.Here's the query:-- main queryselect IDfrom logwhere ID in(-- subqueryselect id from log l1where time_stamp =(select max(time_stamp)from log l2where l2.id = l1.idand l2.type = 11))
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a complex stored procedure that utilises inner joins, and in the WHERE clause there is defined a subquery. This subquery has now cause a performance hit to the ponit where the server is returning a timeout. Need to find an alternate fast solution.....
SELECT BE.BlogEntryID
FROM vw_BlogEntry BE
INNER JOIN @BlogView BC ON BC.CommonID = BE.BlogCommonID
INNER JOIN vw_Blog B ON B.BlogID = BC.BlogID
WHERE
(
...
)
AND
(
....
)
AND
(
-- GET ENTRIES WHERE COMMENT COUNT IS AT LEAST @CommentCount (..or @CommentCount = 0)
@CommentCount <= 0
OR BE.CommonID IN (SELECT bc.EntryCommonID
FROM vw_BlogComment_Current bc
INNER JOIN tblVersionDetails vd ON bc.VersionID = vd.VersionID
WHERE
IsNull(@CommentStatus,'') = ''
OR vd.Status IN (SELECT * FROM fn_CsvToString(@CommentStatus))
GROUP BY bc.EntryCommonID
HAVING COUNT(bc.EntryCommonID) >= @CommentCount)
)
Hello guys,
I would like to know if there is any meaningful difference in speed performance between using the DNS ("sql.server.com") or the IP address of the sql-server in the connection string.
The advantage of using DNS is that if there is any change in IP, I do not have to change the connection strings, but I do not want to loose speed because of the necessity to resolve the DNS.
Thanks for any help!
Regards,
Fabian
my favorit hoster is ASPnix : www.aspnix.com !
Dear All,
is there any difference performance wise using
select * from my_table
and
select mycol1,mycol2....mycoln from my_table
actually i've read from one article the there is big difference....
please clear my doubt...
thanks in advance
Vinod
Even you learn 1%, Learn it with 100% confidence.
For deleting duplicate rows, i can use cursor and subquery.
cursor code
Declare dup_cursor cursor for
select acctnumber from LinkUrnABSADMBAR
group by acctnumber
having count(*) > 1
Open dup_cursor
Fetch Next from dup_cursor INTO @acctnumber
While (@@Fetch_Status = 0)
Begin
Delete from LinkUrnABSADMBAR
where acctnumber = @acctnumber
Fetch Next from dup_cursor INTO @acctnumber
End
Close dup_cursor
Deallocate dup_cursor
Subquery code
delete from galupload2000..test where id in (select id from galupload2000..test group by id having count(*) >1)
My question is which one is Better in performance????????????
Thanks
Sandipan
I have one question what is performance difference between cluster index on numeric field or string field? I know that numeric is faster but why it is faster?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have also posted this in microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming.
I have a query which, depending on where I run it from, will either take 10 milliseconds or 10 seconds.
The query works perfectly when run in SQL Server Management Studio... in my database of around 70,000 items it returns the results in around 10ms. It uses all my indexes and indexed views correctly.
However when I run the identical query from my ASP.NET application, it takes around 10 seconds... 1000 times longer.
Looking at it in Sql Server Profiler I can't see any difference in the query, except from ASP.NET it needs 62531 reads and from SSMS it needs only 318 reads. If I copy the slow running ASP.NET query from the profiler into SSMS, then it runs quick again. The results returned are the same.
I have provided more details of the query below, but I guess my real question is: What is the best way to debug this? I'm not an expert with SQL Server, so any pointers on where I should start looking to find the difference in how the query is being executed would be a great help.
The query is of the form:
WITH RowPost AS
(
SELECT
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY DateCreated DESC) AS Row,
ItemId,
Title,
....
FROM
Items_View WITH(NOEXPAND)
WHERE ItemX >= @minX AND ItemX <= @maxX AND ItemY >= @minY AND ItemY <= @maxY
)
SELECT
*,
(SELECT Count(*) FROM RowPost) AS [Count]
FROM RowPost
WHERE Row >= @minRow AND Row < @maxRow
Where Items_View is an indexed view, and WITH(NOEXPAND) is being used to force it to use the indexed view (this is optimal). The line beginning "SELECT Count(*)" is to get the total number of results (without having to run the inner query a second time).
This is running against SQL Server Developer Edition.
SQL 2000 Connection String:user id=MyUserName;password=MyPassword;initial catalog=MyDB;server=MyServer;Connect Timeout=30 This SELECT statement returns its 10 results nearly instantly:SELECT * FROM MyTableDitto from above, but completes in 30-40 seconds:SELECT * FROM [dbo].[MyTable]Ditto from above, but completes nearly instantly:
SELECT TOP 1000 * FROM [dbo].[MyTable] Obviously I have stopped using the [dbo] syntax in my SqlCommand's (SELECT's and EXECUTE's) but still would like to know why this is.vr, Rich
Hello, all, I started out thinking my problems were elsewhere but as Ihave worked through this I have isolated my problem, currently, as adifference between MSDE and SQL Express 2005 (I'll just call itExpress for simplicity).I have, to try to simplify things, put the exact same DB on twosystems, one running MSDE and one running Express. Both have 2 Ghzprocessors (one Intel, one AMD), both have a decent amount of RAM(Intel system has 1 GB, AMD system has 512 MB), and plenty of GB offree disk space. MSDE is running on the Intel system, Express isrunning on the AMD system. To keep things fair I use the exact sameDB's and query on both systems. The DB's were created on MSDE so Isp_detach_db'd them from MSDE and then sp_attach_db'd them to Express(this is how MS says to do a "side-by-side" upgrade, so it'sacceptable to do so). After fighting problems in performancedifferences in different situations I have narrowed the problem downto this:Executing a simple select statement with join clause on the databasesyields a difference in execution time that is quite great. Using theExpress Management program I can run the query against either system(MSDE or Express, the two systems are connected via crossover cable toeliminate any network problems/issues). When running the queryagainst the MSDE system (which is over the network) I consistently get<20 ms response times on the query. When running the query againstthe Express installation (which is in shared memory) I consistentlyget 700 ms or longer response times. Both times are for the TotalExecution Time.The query is simply this: select db1.* from db1.owner.tablename as db1inner join db2.owner.tablename as db2 on db1.pkey = db2.someid wheredb1.criteria = 3So, gimme all the columns from one table in one DB (local to theinstallation), matching the records in another DB (also local to theinstallation), where one field in the first db matches a field in thesecond db and where, in the first db, one column value = 3.The first table has a total record count of 630 records of which only12 match the where clause. The second table has a total record countof about 2,700 of which only 12 match up on the 12 out of 630.Even though the data is the same and I've done the detach and attach,and even done the sp_updatestats, the difference in execution time isremarkable, in a bad way.Checking the Execution Plan reveals that both queries have the samesteps, but, on the MSDE system the largest consumer in the process isthe Clustered Index Scan of the 630 record table (DB1 in my queryexample), using 85%. The next big consumer is a Clustered Index Seekagainst the other table (2,700 rows), using 15%.The Execution Plan against the Express system reveals basically theexact opposite: 27% going to the Clustered Index Scan of the 630record DB1, and 72% going to the Clustered Index Seek of the 2,700record DB2.I'm sorry to be stupid but I have this information but I don't knowwhat to do with it. The best that I can tell from this is that thisis the source of my problems. My problems are that on my currentsystems that my clients use the data is returned to them faster thanthey can click the mouse and that the new system (that is, when theychose (or are forced by attrition) to move to Vista and thus Express2005) the screen pop is like 1.5 seconds. This creates poor userexperience. Worse, one process I allow the users to do goes fromtaking 14-30 seconds to over 4 minutes (all on the same machine withthe same OS and version of my program, so it's not a machine or OS ormy app problem).Anyway, I hope someone can shed some light on this now that I've paredit down some.Thanks in advance.--HC
View 9 Replies View RelatedHi,
I created a CLR UDF that returns a large number of rows, when I run it from my VPC (XP, SQL Server Developer Edition and 1GB Memory) it takes approx 2 min and 30 secs to start displaying the rows (Using Management Studio), when I run the same query in our development server (Win 2003, SQL Server Enterprise Edition, 8 GB Memory and 8 Processors) it takes more than 15 min to start displaying the results, does anybody have an idea why is this happening?
Thanks in advance
Executing the stored procedure took 45 seconds. But copying the code to a query window and setting up the variables (instead of parameters), it took 7 seconds.
In the query window, most of the processing cost (86%) is right up front in a "Distinct Sort." But in exec stored procedure, the cost for this step is 11% and the significant costs are in later "Table Scans."
I don't know why SQL Server would choose different execution plans when the code is identical in each.
Any quick insights?
Many thanks.
Hi,
I'm having an issue with a query I'm running on Sql Server 2005. It's a semi-complex query involving an in-line table function and several left outer joins which are joined on to the results of the function call. Two of the left outer joins are then qualified in a where clause of the form where table.Col is not null; the idea is that the final result set contains data that has no match in those two tables.
The problem revolves around a where clause in the function and the last left outer join (ie, one of the ones qualified with where not null). When I alter the where clause of the function to further restrict the result set the function returns, the query times shoots up from 1 second to roughly 2-3 minutes. Note that the time the function takes to complete is not affected. The difference in time is purely down to what the query does with the results the function provides. Also note that the change to the where clause provides a subset of the original data; it does not add any more data (it actually restricts the original resultset by roughly 1000 rows).
I can bring the query speed back down again by removing the last left outer join - this join takes one of the columns from the function, and joins it to a small table - 924 rows. So it appears that this particular join is the cause of the issue, but only when using the resultset generated from the modified function query.
Now, as the thread title alludes, Sql Server 2000 and 2005 handle this differently, or appear to. When I execute this same query on a Sql 2000 machine, there's no apparent time differences, and the data that is returned is as expected. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what might be causing this and how I can fix it? I could simply return the larger resultset and use managed code to filter out the rows I don't want; however, I would like to get to the bottom of this, especially if it's going to effect future queries.
Cheers,
Chris
I have encountered a problem with a specific set of tables. The same select yields slightly differing execution plans in two different environments (instances). But the slight variation seems to contain a huge differences in stats. I don't know the significance of these stats. The two tables have the exact same indices.
This is the selcet statement:
SELECT 'xx' FROM DUKS.dbo.Profiler
WHERE DNA_Løbenummer IN
(SELECT DNA_Løbenummer FROM DUKS.dbo.Effektregister
WHERE Sagsnummer = '2015-00002')
hello friends.. I am newbie for sql server...I having a problem when executing this procedure .... ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[spgetvalues] @Uid intASBEGIN SET NOCOUNT ON; select DATEPART(year, c.fy)as fy, (select contribeamount from wh_contribute where and contribename like 'Retire-Plan B-1% JRF' ) as survivorship, (select contribeamount from wh_contribute where and contribename like 'Gross Earnings' and ) as ytdgross, (select contribeamount from wh_contribute where and contribename like 'Retire-Plan B-1.5% JRP') as totalcontrib, from wh_contribute c where c.uid=@Uid Order by fy Asc .....what is the wrong here?? " Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression."please reply asap...
View 1 Replies View RelatedI am getting 2 resultsets depending on conditon, In the secondconditon i am getting the above error could anyone help me..........CREATE proc sp_count_AllNewsPapers@CustomerId intasdeclare @NewsId intset @NewsId = (select NewsDelId from NewsDelivery whereCustomerId=@CustomerId )if not exists(select CustomerId from NewsDelivery whereNewsPapersId=@NewsId)beginselect count( NewsPapersId) from NewsPapersendif exists(select CustomerId from NewsDelivery whereNewsPapersId=@NewsId)beginselect count(NewsDelId) from NewsDelivery whereCustomerid=@CustomeridendGO
View 3 Replies View RelatedSQL Server 2014 BI edition.
select * from sys.dm_os_performance_counters returns the object names prefixed with "SQLServer:" (e.g. SQLServer:Databases)
It was expected as in other editions also. Issue is that when we try to crate "SQLServer Performance Condition alert", object names in "Object" list comes without the prefix "SQLServer:" (e.g. Databases). Please see the attached snapshots.
I am getting an error as
Msg 512, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression.
while running the following query.
SELECT DISTINCT EmployeeDetails.FirstName+' '+EmployeeDetails.LastName AS EmpName,
LUP_FIX_DeptDetails.DeptName AS CurrentDepartment,
LUP_FIX_DesigDetails.DesigName AS CurrentDesignation,
LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails.ProjectName AS CurrentProject,
ManagerName=(SELECT E.FirstName+' '+E.LastName
FROM EmployeeDetails E
INNER JOIN LUP_EmpProject
ON E.Empid=LUP_EmpProject.Empid
INNER JOIN LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails
ON LUP_EmpProject.Projectid = LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails.Projectid
WHERE LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails.Managerid = E.Empid)
FROM EmployeeDetails
INNER JOIN LUP_EmpDepartment
ON EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpDepartment.Empid
INNER JOIN LUP_FIX_DeptDetails
ON LUP_EmpDepartment.Deptid=LUP_FIX_DeptDetails.Deptid
AND LUP_EmpDepartment.Date=(SELECT TOP 1 LUP_EmpDepartment.Date
FROM LUP_EmpDepartment
WHERE EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpDepartment.Empid
ORDER BY LUP_EmpDepartment.Date DESC)
INNER JOIN LUP_EmpDesignation
ON EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpDesignation.Empid
INNER JOIN LUP_FIX_DesigDetails
ON LUP_EmpDesignation.Desigid=LUP_FIX_DesigDetails.Desigid
AND LUP_EmpDesignation.Date=(SELECT TOP 1 LUP_EmpDesignation.Date
FROM LUP_EmpDesignation
WHERE EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpDesignation.Empid
ORDER BY LUP_EmpDesignation.Date DESC)
INNER JOIN LUP_EmpProject
ON EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpProject.Empid
AND LUP_EmpProject.StartDate=(SELECT TOP 1 LUP_EmpProject.StartDate
FROM LUP_EmpProject
WHERE EmployeeDetails.Empid=LUP_EmpProject.Empid
ORDER BY LUP_EmpProject.StartDate DESC)
INNER JOIN LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails
ON LUP_EmpProject.Projectid=LUP_FIX_ProjectDetails.Projectid
WHERE EmployeeDetails.Empid=1
PLEASE HELP.................
Hi,
I've running the below query for months ans suddenly today started getting the following error :"Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression."
Any ideas as to why??
SELECT t0.DocNum, t0.Status, t0.ItemCode, t0.Warehouse, t0.OriginNum, t0.U_SOLineNo, ORDR.NumAtCard, ORDR.CardCode, OITM_1.U_Cultivar,
RDR1.U_Variety,
(SELECT OITM.U_Variety
FROM OWOR INNER JOIN
WOR1 ON OWOR.DocEntry = WOR1.DocEntry INNER JOIN
OITM INNER JOIN
OITB ON OITM.ItmsGrpCod = OITB.ItmsGrpCod ON WOR1.ItemCode = OITM.ItemCode
WHERE (OITB.ItmsGrpNam = 'Basic Fruit') AND (OWOR.DocNum = t0.DocNum)) AS Expr1, OITM_1.U_Organisation, OITM_1.U_Commodity,
OITM_1.U_Pack, OITM_1.U_Grade, RDR1.U_SizeCount, OITM_1.U_InvCode, OITM_1.U_Brand, OITM_1.U_PalleBase, OITM_1.U_Crt_Pallet,
OITM_1.U_LabelType, RDR1.U_DEPOT, OITM_1.U_PLU, RDR1.U_Trgt_Mrkt, RDR1.U_Wrap_Type, ORDR.U_SCCode
FROM OWOR AS t0 INNER JOIN
ORDR ON t0.OriginNum = ORDR.DocNum INNER JOIN
RDR1 ON ORDR.DocEntry = RDR1.DocEntry AND t0.U_SOLineNo - 1 = RDR1.LineNum INNER JOIN
OITM AS OITM_1 ON t0.ItemCode = OITM_1.ItemCode
WHERE (t0.Status <> 'L')
Thanks
Jacquues
Dear All,We have a database which contains many tables which have millions ofrecords. When We attach the database with MS SQL Server 2005 StandardEdition Server and run some queries (having joins, filters etc.) thenthey take very long time to execute while when We execute same querieson Enterprise Edition then they run 10 times faster than on standardedition.Our database does not use any features which are present in EnterpriseEdition and not present in Standard Edition. We want to know what arethe differences between Standard Edition and Enterprise Edition forperformance. Why should we go for Enterprise Edition when StandardEdition has all the features required.We are presently using evaluation versions of SQL Server 2005 Standardand Enterprise Editions.Thanks and regards,Nishant Sainihttp://www.simplyjava.com
View 23 Replies View RelatedHello,I have been searching and reading a lots of information on the microsoft website about the different version of SQL server, but still can not make my decision.In term of performance, is there a real big difference between the workgroup and the standard version? The workgroup is limited to 3 GB of RAM while the standard is unlimited, would that really change the performance if my server has 16Gb or RAM?The price difference is pretty substantial so if could only have to buy the workgroup , it would be better.One more question, regarding the type of licence, my server has 2 processors, could I avoid buying 2 licences and get the Server plus CAL instead. I am using this server to host 4 web-application running on SQL server. Each database is about 15 MB.Thanks in adavance for your advises.Arno
View 3 Replies View RelatedHi!
What is the difference in performance if I use a Temp-table or a local-table variable in a storedprocedure?
Why?
//Daniel
Is there a perf difference between:
create function dbo.zzz
returns uniqueidentifier
return '0000-0000-0000-00000000'
select dbo.zzz
vs.
se;ect '0000-0000-0000-00000000'
Thanks,
J
Hi guys,
A have a problem that I need understand.... I have 2 server with the same configuration...
SERVER01:
-----------------------------------------------------
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2191 (Intel IA-64)
Mar 27 2006 11:51:52
Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 1)
sp_dboption 'BB_XXXXX'
The following options are set:
-----------------------------------
trunc. log on chkpt.
auto create statistics
auto update statistics
********************************
SERVER02:
-----------------------------------------------------
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2191 (Intel IA-64)
Mar 27 2006 11:51:52
Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 1)
sp_dboption 'BB_XXXXX'
The following options are set:
-----------------------------------
trunc. log on chkpt.
auto create statistics
auto update statistics
OK, the problem is that if a run the below query in server01, i get error 512:
Msg 512, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression.
But, if run the same query in the server02, the query work fine -.
I know that I can use IN, EXISTS, TOP, etc ... but I need understand this behavior.
Any idea WHY?
SELECT dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.dt_saldo,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.cd_indice_opf,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.cd_classificacao,
dbo.opf_movimento_operacao.ds_tipo_transacao ds_tipo_transacao_movimento ,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.ds_tipo_transacao ds_tipo_transacao_header,
'SD' ds_status_operacao,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.ds_tipo_opcao ,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.id_empresa,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.ic_empresa_cliente,
0 vl_entrada_compra_ctro ,0 vl_entrada_compra_premio,
0 vl_entrada_venda_ctro , 0 vl_entrada_venda_premio,
0 vl_saida_compra_ctro, 0 vl_saida_compra_premio,
0 vl_saida_venda_ctro, 0 vl_saida_venda_premio,
0 vl_lucro , 0 vl_prejuizo, 0 vl_naoexec_contrato,
0 vl_naoexec_premio,
sum(dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.vl_aprop_ganho) vl_aprop_ganho,
sum(dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.vl_aprop_perda) vl_aprop_perda,
sum(dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.vl_rever_ganho) vl_rever_ganho,
sum(dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.vl_rever_perda) vl_rever_perda,
sum(dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.vl_irrf) vl_irrf
FROM dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx,
dbo.opf_header_operacao ,
dbo.opf_movimento_operacao
WHERE dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.dt_saldo = '6-29-2007 0:0:0.000'
and ( dbo.opf_header_operacao.no_contrato = dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.no_contrato )
and ( dbo.opf_header_operacao.no_contrato = dbo.opf_movimento_operacao.no_contrato )
and ( dbo.opf_movimento_operacao.dt_pregao = (select (o.dt_pregao) from dbo.opf_movimento_operacao o
where o.no_contrato = dbo.opf_movimento_operacao.no_contrato and o.dt_pregao <='6-28-2007 0:0:0.000' ) )
and (dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.ic_tipo_saldo = 'S')
group by dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.dt_saldo,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.cd_indice_opf,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.cd_classificacao,
dbo.opf_movimento_operacao.ds_tipo_transacao,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.ds_tipo_transacao ,
ds_status_operacao,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.ds_tipo_opcao ,
dbo.opf_header_operacao.id_empresa,
dbo.opf_saldo_ctb_opc_flx.ic_empresa_cliente
Thanks
Nilton Pinheiro
I am trying to add the results of both of these queries together:
The purpose of the first query is to find the number of nulls in the TimeZone column.
Query 1:
SELECT COUNT(*) - COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename
The purpose of the second query is to find results in the AAST, AST, etc timezones.
Query 2:
SELECT COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename
WHERE TimeZone NOT IN ('EST', 'MST', 'PST', 'CST')
Note: both queries produce a whole number with no decimals. Ran individually both queries produce accurate results. However, what I would like is one query which produced a single INT by adding both results together. For example, if Query 1 results to 5 and query 2 results to 10, I would like to see a single result of 15 as the output.
What I came up with (from research) is:
SELECT ((SELECT COUNT(*) - COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename) + (SELECT COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename
WHERE TimeZone NOT IN ('EST', 'MST', 'PST', 'CST'))
I get a msq 102, level 15, state 1 error.
I also tried
SELECT ((SELECT COUNT(*) - COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename) + (SELECT COUNT (TimeZone)
FROM tablename
WHERE TimeZone NOT IN ('EST', 'MST', 'PST', 'CST')) as IVR_HI_n_AK_results
but I still get an error. For the exact details see:
[URL]
NOTE: the table in query 1 and query 2 are the same table. I am using T-SQL in SQL Server Management Studio 2008.
Question is in the subject.
Thanks in advance
-Jamie
1. Use mssql server agent service to take the schedule
2. Use a .NET windows service with timers to call SqlClientConnection
above, which way would be faster and get a better performance?
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 RelatedHello 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 witha particular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return100 rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query insingle user mode. So I tested the query on the Development server bytaking a backup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the devserver. I ran the same query and found that it ran in less than asecond.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 isrelated to some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc.Or could it be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQLServer configuations 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 systemrelated issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T
View 2 Replies View RelatedHi and thanks in advance for the help.
Here's what I'm trying to do, I need to select all the rows from one table, and only 1 row from a related table.
Table setup
Table1:
Field 1 = PK Ident
Table2:
Field1 = FK ident
I need to select all the rows that exist in Table 1, and I need 1 row out of table2 where Field1 is equal to the Table1.Field1 value (multiple records in table2 will exist with that same value.) I need the top row using a SELECT TOP 1
I was trying to do this with a subquery, but SQL is throwing an error asking me for EXISTS statments.
I have the following as a subquery in a larger stored procedure:
SELECT P.ProductId, P.ProductName, P.Category , (SELECT MAX(O.Orderdate) FROM dbo.[Orders] AS O WHERE O.ProductId=P.ProductId) As MostRecentOrder, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY MostRecentOrder DESC) AS RowNumber FROM dbo.[Products] AS P WHERE P.Category=@category
@category is an input parameter
I am getting an error pointing to the Order By clause stating that "MostRecentOrder" is an invalid column name. If I sort by P.ProductId or P.ProductName, it works fine. Any ideas?
Thanks
Hi All, This Subquery is kicking my ***. Maybe you can help. I want to query a query.I have the user enter a phrase from a textbox, then I want to group the results by element_label. This is what i have so far, but its not working. SELECT Element_ID, Element_Label, Element_Name, Question_ID, Question_Label, Question_Level, Question_Text, RelatedSRR
FROM qryforaspx
WHERE ([Question_Text] LIKE '%' + ? + '%')
IN
SELECT Element_Label FROM Description
Group by
Element_label Thanks,
Has anyone seen where subqueries collapse into a sum??? I have code like the following, which has been running fine for over a year:UPDATE Reports..DataStats SET Vendors_Cnt = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors__AllRecords), Vendors_Audit_Cnt = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvAudit), Vendors_Rpts_Cnt = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inv12mo), Vendors_InvUnused = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvUnused),Vendors_InvOne = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvOne), Vendors_InvMulti = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvMulti), Vendors_InvUnpaid = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvUnpaid), Vendors_InvNewer = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvNewer), Vendors_Inv12mo = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inv12mo), Vendors_InvPrior = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvPrior), Vendors_InvSkipYear = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvSkipYear), Vendors_Known = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Known), Vendors_Orphaned = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Orphaned), Vendors_Active = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Active), Vendors_Inactive = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inactive), Vendors_Excluded = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Excluded)WHERE (AuditName = @AuditName)But now it is generating overflows....and is not equivalent to (ignoring the obvious UPDATE vs. return differences for illustration):SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors__AllRecordsSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvAuditSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inv12mo SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvUnusedSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvOneSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvMultiSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvUnpaid SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvNewer SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inv12mo SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvPrior SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_InvSkipYear SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_KnownSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_OrphanedSELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Active SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_Inactive SELECT COUNT(*) FROM vVendors_ExcludedThis appears to have started around the beginning of May. Anyone else suffer after patches?
View 5 Replies View Related