New answers tagged

0

Why? Because the performance would be awful. Microsoft marketing literature is to get people to buy the product, it's not for you to read every line and take it on faith that this is exactly how the product will work in every circumstance. So when you see fantastic claims about disk space reduction and 40x IMOLTP speed increases that's when your alarm bells ...


0

In SQL Server 2016, if you have & processing over million of rows, the only thing that would not allow you to use Columnstore Indexes will be the current technology limitations, such as Replication on CCI, CLR, CDC or CT over CCI and so on ... Otherwise this should be a default way to approach any modern Data Warehouse.


1

The second version looks more realistic. Mobile devices and computers can change their users and this version allows to keep the history.


2

The option only takes effect during bulk loads to tables, so you would need to re-load your data which seems a bit pointless, or accept it's only relevant for new data loads. The KB Article is fairly clear: The -E option must be used before the original data load because it does not affect existing data, only new allocations. I would also say this is ...


2

You could use UNION in the CTE. There is still some duplication of code but less than before: with etl (storenumber, filename, last_extracted) as ( ( select distinct on (storenumber) storenumber, 'storefinancialdate', extracteddate + extractedtime::time from storefinancialdate order by storenumber, ...


1

You might be asking too broad of a question but if you wanted to have a user only have access to a table in SQL Server you could simply do a: --Create Server Level User USE [master] GO CREATE LOGIN [(UserName)] WITH PASSWORD=N'PutPasswordHere' DEFAULT_DATABASE=[DatabaseName] GO --Create DB Level Uesr use [DatabaseName] GO CREATE USER (username) FOR LOGIN (...



Top 50 recent answers are included