Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- From: Erland Sommarskog <esquel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 21:33:38 +0000 (UTC)
sql_server_user (kaioptera@xxxxxxxxx) writes:
I reclustered the table and the query is of course much faster now. I
need to keep both versions of the table around for a while to see how
they compare for all the queries we run, so I have an insert trigger
keeping them in sync.
Good to hear that it worked out.
I tried the other permutations of the query you suggested, Erland, and
they had no effect on the execution plan or performance.
Good! This indicates that the query might be stable. :-) I've experienced
situations where such "meaningless" permuation affected the query plan,
so I wanted you to try all three.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
.
- References:
- Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- From: sql_server_user
- Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- From: Erland Sommarskog
- Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- From: sql_server_user
- Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- From: sql_server_user
- Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- Prev by Date: Re: SQL2005 collation vs Oracle
- Next by Date: Re: Select several values into a single variable
- Previous by thread: Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?
- Next by thread: JDBC - varchar or nvarchar fields?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|