Indexing A Table With 80 Million Records
Mar 26, 2004
i have a directory database with approx. 80 million records. i am feeding the database with bulk_insert. Indexing one of the fields took about 8 hrs. After indexing when i run queries with the indexed field the response time is under 1 sec. However if i run select queries with like on non-indexed fields it takes more than 2 mins. So i decided to index 4 other fields in the database and it looks like the indexing process is going to run for 2 days.
i am a novice in SQL database design and i am not sure if this is the best way to index the table. i am just using create index. Any suggestions / advice welcome.
View 5 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Jun 12, 2015
I have a requirement to delete 1 Million records from a table having 10 Million data and it's being queried on 24/7 basis (don't have a downtime). how can I achieve that?
View 13 Replies
View Related
Sep 23, 2014
I come from a web based world were loading 1.5 million records into a temp table is suicide. I’m doing more data warehouse stuff now and I was looking into optimizing a buddies proc and noticed he was loading 1.5 million records into a temp table. We had a discussion about it because being from a web world I was drastically against it. He on the other hand didn’t feel it was an issue being it gets called once maybe twice a day. The tempdb is set to autogrow and it is on a different drive than all the other databases on the box. It has one ldf and mdf. He’s creating an index on the table after load. Why we shouldn’t be loading 1.5 million recs into temp table?
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jul 21, 2015
I am trying to update a large table which consists of 45 million records , it is taking more than 2 days to the update , below is my approach
1. The table has only one clustered index and no other indexes on the table.
2. I am updating in batches say 20000 record-wise.
3. Changed the recovery mode to bulk logged and auto-growth size is set to 300MB and there is enough space in my disk for transaction log .
But still the query is running slowly.
View 10 Replies
View Related
Feb 16, 2006
All,
I need to load a 50 million records table monthly. Any suggestion about the best/fast way to do it?
Thanks a lot
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 6, 2015
I have a table that I need to do some computations on all the data but first I need to remove the duplicate records and insert the results into a destination table. Here's the example below. My table has 3.1 million rows. I have tried using the DISTINCT and the GROUP BY but both ways to select the data takes about half a minute to run. I'm wondering if there is a way to increase performance. Users are ok with this time since the process runs overnight but improving it won't hurt. I do have a clustered index on these fields but that doesn't seem to improve any.
SELECTDateYear ,
DateMonth ,
Nbr ,
Nbr1 ,
Nbr2 ,
Datafield1 ,
Datafield2,
[code].....
View 7 Replies
View Related
Mar 12, 2015
We are facing a weird scenario in which the snapshot is getting corrupted after insertupdate few million records in to a table .
SQL Server 2012
windows server 2008 R2
service pack 1
64-bit OS
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 27, 2006
I am currently working on a simple page to insert 1.6 million UK postcode records into an SQL server table. The table has three columns for the postcode, longditude coordinate and lattitude coordinate. The data is sourced from a pipe (|) delimited txt file and inserted into the database using a FOR loop. The problem I have is that the page will hang after inserting only 10,000 records, the page displays either an invalid View State error or a page cannot be found error.
Now I assume the viewstate error stems from the fact that there is a form on the page which simply contains a button to execute the script and a few labels to show the progress. But without the form and associated viewstate the insert still fails to complete.... any ideas?? Would I be better running this on a thread or should I just do it in stages and be patient. I have now modified the page to read the database on load and pick up from where it crashes?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 30, 2006
Meg writes "Hi,
I have a table that has 4+ million records. I need to update those records. I am facing some performance issue. Can someone please advice?
update stage
set batch_status = 1
where update_status = 0
Update transaction
Set aId = s.aId,
b = s.b,
from stage s
Where s.aId = transaction.aId
and s.batch_status = 1
Update stage
Set update_status = 1,
batch_status = 2
where
batch_status = 1
When I run the above query with "set rowcount 1000", it runs in one minute. When I run the query for "set rowcount 10000", it runs in 1 hour 56 minutes. Can someone help me to optimize it?
Thanks.
Meg"
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jul 20, 2005
Hey folks...So I have a table that looks like this:CREATE TABLE [tblStation] ([CAMPAIGN] [varchar] (8),[LISTNUM] [varchar] (10),[PHONE] [varchar] (10),[EVENTTIME] [datetime] ,[STATION] [int],[OPERATOR] [varchar] (16),[EVENTCODE] [varchar],[CALLSPAN] [decimal](18, 0),[FDISP] [int],[RECORDNUM] [varchar],[STC] [varchar],[PROMOC] [varchar],[EXP_CAMP] [varchar],[PROMO3] [varchar],[MAXATT] [char],[LISTNAME] [varchar],[SITENAME] [char],[Row_id] [int] IDENTITYIt's taking nine seconds to run the following command:SELECT count([fdisp])FROM [TrunkFiles_new].[dbo].[tblStation] WITH (NOLOCK)WHERE fdisp IS NULLAnyone familiar with a table of this size having performance likethis? The [fdisp] column has a non clustered index on it.Thanks in advance...
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 16, 2001
How well SQL Server can support 300 million records...
Any body is working on big database like this. can anyone give me some input on this. it's going to be 60GB database size.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 19, 2008
Hello,
What is the fastest way to update 20million records in our database.
I have tried to do a simple update statement like this:
update trail_log with (tablockx, holdlock)
set trail_log .entry_by = users.user_identity
from users
where trail_log.entry_by = users.user_id
but it take 10 plus hours to run since it cannot commit the transactions until the very end. So was was thinking that I need to commit in batch like after 50K but that is slow as well.
Set rowcount 50000
Declare @rc int
Set @rc=50000
While @rc=50000
Begin
Begin Transaction
update trail_log With (tablockx, holdlock)
set trail_log.entry_by = users.user_identity
from users
where trail_log.entry_by = users.user_id
and trail_log.entry_by not like '%[0-9]%'
Select @rc=@@rowcount
--Commit the transaction
Commit
End
go
I have let the above statement run for 1.5 hours and it only update 450000 rows. Any ideas...
Maybe I'm doing it wrong. Please Help!!
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 12, 2007
Hi all,
I have a sql script that updates records in a table with 40 million records.
There is some functionality in the script that could be put away in functions for code reuse/elegance.
Functions would cause execution overhead.
What else could I use besides functions that would allow me the code reuse and not compromise the execution over head? Is there any thing like includes in TSQL that would allow me to do so?
TIA..
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 23, 2007
Hi
I have a new client with an existing system that has just over 2 million business listings in one table. Each business listing is associated with one business category.
* Company Table (around 20 fields):
companyID
companyName
categoryID
state
postCode
etc.
* Category Table (5 fields)
categoryID
categoryName
etc.
We are using MSSQL 2005 Express Edition with Advanced Services
A free text search needs to be performed on the companyName and categoryName limited by region (state and or postcode).
1) What kind of response times should I expect for the free text search (I have not used the free text search before)
2) How should I index the companyName and categoryName so they are both used in a joined query? i.e. Do I just configure the free text search index on each field separately and it should work?
Any suggestions appreciated.
Best Regards
Kevan
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 18, 2014
I want to compare ONLY 1 Column values from 2 tables having more than 4.9 million records. There is a difference of 4000 rows between the 2 tables.
SELECT ID From TABLE1 where ID not in (SELECT DISTINCT ID From TABLE2)
My above query took nearly 4.5 hours to run and I had to cancel it. Is there a better way to write the query . I just want to compare the ID - column values which are missing in TABLE2
View 7 Replies
View Related
Apr 8, 2008
Hi
I have 2 tables with more then million records in each and I have to perform full outer join.
The problem is that the join clause contains 2 different parameters (int and string) like this:
Select *
From a full outer join b
On a.cli = b.cli OR a.reference = b.reference
Because of the OR in the clause and the million records the query is infinite. If I change to one rule only then it works fine.
How can I join these 2 big tables with 2 rules?
Thanks
Itay
View 2 Replies
View Related
May 18, 2006
I have tried to process > 3 million Fuzzy grouping records on two different servers with no success. 3 mill works but anything above 4 mill doesn't. Some background:
We are trying to de-dup our customer table on: name (.5 min), address1 (.5 min), city (.5 min), state (exact). .8 overall record min score.
Output includes additional fields: customerid, sourceid, address2, country, phonenumber
Without SP1 installed I couldn't even get a few hundred thousand records to process
Two different servers - same problems. Note that SSIS and SQL Server are running locally on both
The higher end server has 4GB RAM, the other 2.5 GB RAM. Plenty of free disk space on both
SQL Server is configured to use 2 GB of RAM max
The page file is currently at 15GB
After running a number of test on both servers trying different batch sizes etc. the one thing I noticed is that it seems to always error out when SSIS takes over and starts chewing up all the available RAM. This happens after the index is created and SSIS starts "warming caches". On both servers SQL Server uses up about 1.6GB of RAM at this point while SSIS keeps taking over RAM until all physical RAM is used up.
Some questions:
Has anyone been able to process more then 3 million records and if so what is your hardware configuration?
Should we try running SSIS from a different server so it has access to the full amount of physical RAM? (so it doesn't have to fight for RAM with SQL Server)
Should we install Win 2003 Enterprise Server so we can add more RAM?
Any ideas why switching to the page file might be causing errors?
Thanks!!
Keith Doyle
View 17 Replies
View Related
Nov 10, 2014
I have 2 tables with this schema
CREATE TABLE tableValues(
[LASTENCRYPTIONDT] [datetime] NULL,
[ENCRYPTIONID] [int] NULL,
[NAME] [varchar](50) NULL
[Code] ....
I want to update tableToUpdate in batches of 5000 per batch and set the lastenecryptionDT to null based on the the join to the tableValues using the column ENCRYPTIONID, and also output updated rows into another table. Incase I would need to do a rollback.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 24, 2015
i have table below
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[DR_Test](
[source_item_id] [int] NOT NULL,
[source_line_no] [int] NULL,
[buyer_id] [int] NOT NULL,
[seller_member_id] [int] NULL,
[code]...
the table contains more than 80 million records so when i fetch the data using buyer_id & timezone its taking lot of more than 1 hours or so....& where buyer_id is not unique.how to fetch the data fast or need to change the structure of the table
View 3 Replies
View Related
Aug 21, 2007
I have 1+ CSV files (using a foreach loop) which I'm doing a lot of transform work on and then inserting into a SQL database table.
Each CSV file usually contains about 2 days worth of data (contains date stamps) - somewhere in the region of 60k records per day.
The destination table currently contains 3 million+ rows and will get bigger.
I need to make sure that before inserting into the destination table, the data doesn't already exist.
I've read the following article: http://www.sqlis.com/311.aspx
While the lookup method works, it takes ages and eats up memory as it caches the 3m+ records before running for each CSV. Obviously this will only get worse as the table grows in size.
To make things a little more efficient what I'd like to do, is first derive the dates I'm dealing with in the current file - essentially storing the max(date) and min(date) in variables. Then in the lookup SQL use those vars, to reduce the amount of data that needs to be brought into the transformation to check against before inserting into the destination table.
Lookup SQL eg. SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE Date BETWEEN varMinDate AND varMaxDate.
Ideally I'd use an aggregate transformation and then use the subsequent output from that either in the lookup query or store the output in vars, but I don't think you can do that and I get the feeling I'm approaching this with the wrong mindset.
Any thoughts would be great!
View 6 Replies
View Related
May 20, 2015
I have a pretty simple SSIS package that fast loads a 100 million record table into a SQL Server 2008 table on a daily basis. This normally runs fine and completes in about 1 hour. As this is perhaps one of our largest running SSIS packages, about once every 2-3 weeks this SSIS will fail/drop connection. Once it fails, the large number of records will start rolling back. This rollback process can take 1+ hours so I cannot even restart the failed SSIS package immediately. This is a problem.
I am looking for a solution or option so I do not have to wait on that rollback to restart this particular, long running SSIS package. Is there an option/setting to leave the partial data set committed and not rollback? Then I could just restart the SSIS package immediately or set it the SSIS to auto-restart 1 time on failure. The first step in the SSIS does a truncate of the destination table.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 11, 2013
We have a table with 16 Million records, and also this table is replicated.
We want to add a new column in to this table for some reason?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 20, 2005
Hello,We maintain a 175 million record database table for our customer.This is an extract of some data collected for them by a third partyvendor, who sends us regular updates to that data (monthly).The original data for the table came in the form of a single, largetext file, which we imported.This table contains name and address information on potentialcustomers.It is a maintenance nightmare for us, as prior to this the largesttable we maintained was about 10 million records, with lesscomplicated updates required.Here is the problem:* In order to do the searching we need to do on the table it has 8 ofits 20 columns indexed.* It takes hours and hours to do anything to the table.* I'd like to cut down as much as possible the time required to updatethe file.We receive monthly one file containing 10 million records that arenew, and can just be appended to the table (no problem, simple importinto SQL Server).We also receive monthly one file containing 10 million records thatare updates of information in the table. This is the tricky one. Theonly way to uniquely pair up a record in the update file with a recordin the full database table is by a combination of individual_id, zip,and zip_plus4.There can be multiple records in the database for any givenindividual, because that individual could have a history that includesmultiple addresses.How would you recommend handling this update? So far I have mostlytried a number of execution plans involving deleting out the recordsin the table that match those in the text file, so I can then importthe text file, but the best of those plans takes well over 6 hours torun.My latest thought: Would it help in any way to partition the tableinto a number of smaller tables, with a view used to reference them?We have no performance issues querying the table, but I need somethoughts on how to better maintain it.One more thing, we do have 2 copies of the table on the server at alltimes so that one can be actively used in production while we runupdates on the other one, so I can certainly try out some suggestionsover the next week.Regards,Warren WrightDallas
View 7 Replies
View Related
Apr 6, 2007
I don't work much with the back end of software development so there is a lot about SQL Server I do not know.
We are building a database. The database will have about 10 tables in it. 3 of these tables will probably have a huge amount of data in them. Specifically each one of the 3 tables will each have about a half a million database records in it. Each record is about 100 characters max in length.(Im am including numbers as characters and summing the individual columns/fields to come up with 100).
Will a SQL server database table with A half a million records in it be possible? We have tried to normalize the database to cut down on the size of the table but it all comes out to about a half a million records per table.
Any help is deeply appreciated.
Bill
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jun 27, 2007
Dear all,
i need to design a database table which will store supplier's demand information. 1 supplier will probably have 10000 records and there are posibility that there are 10,000 suppliers. So, in total, the number of records will be 10000 * 10000 = XXXXA LOT XXXX which will be very large number of record to be inserted into a table. So, how can i design an table and structure to cater this scenario? Thanks.
Hope to hear from you..
View 10 Replies
View Related
Feb 27, 2008
I'm looking for some performance assistance on updating a column value in a table that contains approximately 50 million rows. I have a permanent table in another database that has the key column and value to be set. My query is listed below, but I'm afraid it will run quite awhile. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
update mytable
set column2 = b.column2
from mytable as a
join mytable1 as b
on a.column1 = b.column1
There is a one to one relationship between the two tables.
View 8 Replies
View Related
Jan 17, 2008
My environment is SQL 2000. I have a table with 500 million rows. The table is consistently getting updated and inserted. I can not take the table offline. My clustered index needs to be rebuilt due to decreased performance. How do I accomplish this?
View 7 Replies
View Related
Nov 5, 2005
DELETING 100 million from a table weekly SQl SERVER 2000Hi AllWe have a table in SQL SERVER 2000 which has about 250 million recordsand this will be growing by 100 million every week. At a time the tableshould contain just 13 weeks of data. when the 14th week data needs tobe loaded the first week's data has to be deleted.And this deletes 100 million every week, since the delete is taking lotof transaction log space the job is not successful.Can you please help with what are the approaches we can take to fixthis problem?Performance and transaction log are the issues we are facing. We trieddeletion in steps too but that also is taking time. What are thedifferent ways we can address this quickly.Please reply at the earliest.ThanksHarish
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jul 29, 2014
I am doing a performance testing for In-memory option is sql server 2014. As a part I want to insert 500 million rows of records into a in-memory enabled test table I have created.
I need a sample script to insert 500 million records into a table ....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Sep 17, 2015
I have been tasked with writing an update query to update a table with more than 150 million rows of data. Here are the table structures:
Source Tables :
OC
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[OC](
[OC] [nvarchar](255) NULL,
[DATE DEBUT] [date] NULL,
[DATE FIN] [date] NULL,
[Code Article] [nvarchar](255) NULL,
[INSERTION] [nvarchar](255) NULL,
[Code] ....
The update requirement is as follows:
DECLARE @Counter INT=0 --This causes the @@rowcount to be > 0
while @@rowcount>0
BEGIN
SET rowcount 10000
update r
set Comp=t.Comp
[Code] ....
The update took more than 48h and didn't terminate , how to accelerate it ?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Jul 25, 2007
Can anyone help me on this...
when i select data from table using select statement it takes huge amount of time....The table contains 7 million entries and when i select by mentioning a criteria it takes around 45 secs..The system has 4GB RAM and Dual Processing CPU. The select statement does not contain any grouping and all..
Will it take this much time to retrieve data.?.
The table does include an indexed field,
So can anyone help me on the different things i can do to make the retrieval faster?
Andy
View 5 Replies
View Related
Aug 30, 2007
I have a row that is being used log track plays on our website.
Here's the table:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Music_BandTrackPlays](
[ListenDate] [datetime] NOT NULL DEFAULT (getdate()),
[TrackId] [int] NOT NULL,
[IPAddress] [varchar](20)
) ON [PRIMARY]
There's a CLUSTERED INDEX on ListenDate ASC and a NON CLUSTERED INDEX on the TrackId.
I have a TRIGGER on the Music_BandTrackPlays table that looks like the following:
CREATE TRIGGER [trig_Increment_Music_BandTrackPlays_PlayCount]
ON [dbo].[Music_BandTrackPlays] AFTER INSERT
AS
UPDATE
Music_BandTracks
SET
Music_BandTracks.PlayCount = Music_BandTracks.PlayCount + TP.PlayCount
FROM
(SELECT TrackId, COUNT(*) AS PlayCount
FROM inserted
GROUP BY TrackId) AS TP
WHERE
Music_BandTracks.TrackId = TP.TrackId
When a simple INSERT statement is done on the Music_BandTrackPlays table, it can take quite a long time. When I remove the TRIGGER the INSERTs are immediate. The Execution plan for the TRIGGER shows that a 'Inserted Scan' is taking up most of the resources.
How exactly is the pseudo 'inserted' table formed?
For now, I think the easiest thing to do is update my logging page so it performs 2 queries. One to UPDATE the Music_BandTracks table and increment the counter, and perform the INSERT into the Music_BandTrackPlays table seperately.
I'm ok with that solution but I would really like to understand why the TRIGGER is taking so long. The 'inserted' pseudo table will be 1 row 99% of the time. Does SQL Server perform a table scan on all 20 million rows in order to determine what's new and put it in the inserted pseudo table?
Thanks!
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 24, 2013
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT TOP 1 1 FROM dbo.syscolumns WHERE id = OBJECT_ID(N'dbo.Employee) and name = 'DoNotCall')
BEGIN
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Employee] ADD [DoNotCall] bit not null Constraint DoNot_Call_Default DEFAULT 0
IF ( @@ERROR <> 0 )
GOTO QuitWithRollback
END
It just takes a LOT of time in SQL Server Management studio. I have to cancel the query and cancelling takes a whole lot time. I am using SQL Server 2008.
View 4 Replies
View Related
