Wrox Programmer Forums

Need to download code?

View our list of code downloads.

Go Back   Wrox Programmer Forums > SQL Server > SQL Server 2000 > SQL Server 2000
Password Reminder
Register
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
SQL Server 2000 General discussion of Microsoft SQL Server -- for topics that don't fit in one of the more specific SQL Server forums. version 2000 only. There's a new forum for SQL Server 2005.
Welcome to the p2p.wrox.com Forums.

You are currently viewing the SQL Server 2000 section of the Wrox Programmer to Programmer discussions. This is a community of tens of thousands of software programmers and website developers including Wrox book authors and readers. As a guest, you can read any forum posting. By joining today you can post your own programming questions, respond to other developers’ questions, and eliminate the ads that are displayed to guests. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free .
DRM-free e-books 300x50
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old November 7th, 2005, 05:41 PM
Authorized User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , , .
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

sargable comes from combining search and argument meaning your where clauses will be able to use the index (will speed up your retrieval)


“I sense many useless updates in you... Useless updates lead to fragmentation... Fragmentation leads to downtime...Downtime leads to suffering..Fragmentation is the path to the darkside.. DBCC INDEXDEFRAG and DBCC DBREINDEX are the force...May the force be with you" -- http://sqlservercode.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old November 7th, 2005, 08:30 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange County, CA, USA.
Posts: 385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Sargable was IBM's database slang term that got hijacked into many different directions. If you ask IBM what it is they say one thing, while MS uses it in different ways. (just my opinion I wait to see an actual definition in a dictionary)

Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old November 7th, 2005, 08:31 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange County, CA, USA.
Posts: 385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

oops we hijack this thread in yet ANOTHER direction, roflmao.... ;)

Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old November 7th, 2005, 08:35 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange County, CA, USA.
Posts: 385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I work on Oracle, MS, Sybase, MSSQL. Don't matter much to me, I just like the Database work. Access is perhaps the most prevalent work available but I have my standards. MS-SQL is generally good enough but its sadly not advancing hardly at all compared to Oracle or even free Postgresql. I prefer Oracle work when I can. But if I can't get work on a sky scraper then I go work building sheds, lol. It all depends on the pay. Open source right now generally pays the least so I don't get that much Postgresql work or Mysql for that matter. Who ever really does the exact type of work they want to do.

Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old November 7th, 2005, 08:54 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange County, CA, USA.
Posts: 385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I agree with rstelma's post about replicating the data and reporting off the replicated version but that creates managment issues, doubles storage requirements, etc. My point is mainly to say that the MS solution on locking is kludge management. If you believe you can prevent deadlocking try it on a terrabyte database that is in full use on MS-SQL. Where people are doing large selects combined with inserts and updates. Not the MS terabyte marketing database where they claim they have no scalability issues. Then if you look at what they did they strung a bunch of federated servers together that only retrieve data (select only) and said it was the same as what Oracle, DB and the rest can do. Lets face it MS don't handle large volume and you cant protect yourself from deadlocks once your database gets large enough. MS does what you suggest, break the database into smaller pieces small enought that MS can handle. But when you do that how many MS-SQL licenses do you need to buy?

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Combining two Queries arholly Access 1 January 16th, 2007 06:40 PM
Joining 3 Queries. rupen SQL Language 1 May 11th, 2006 11:35 AM
Combining Parameter Queries Taarnac SQL Language 0 May 4th, 2005 11:13 AM
combine 2 queries collie SQL Server 2000 2 November 29th, 2004 03:09 PM
Queries xzvi0r Access 5 September 8th, 2003 10:03 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.