network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 8 months |
| seen | Feb 3 at 3:20 | |
| stats | profile views | 3 |
|
Oct 30 |
comment |
Query performance of a NULL vs an empty ('') varchar in SQL Server 2012 @FabricioAraujo The blank string varchar's do make up about about 25% of the about 125k records in the table. Would that be the reason why? I ended up creating a join table filled with distinct values from that varchar (i.e. only one blank varchar) which are assigned to a key which are then assigned back to the original table. That seems to have improved performance for those queries greatly. I'd still love to hear thoughts. Sorry for the lack of upfront information. |
|
Oct 25 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Oct 25 |
accepted | Why is the install of SQL Server 2012 in Windows Server 2012 taking over previously accessible hard drive's? |
|
Oct 25 |
answered | Why is the install of SQL Server 2012 in Windows Server 2012 taking over previously accessible hard drive's? |
|
Oct 25 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Oct 25 |
revised |
Query performance of a NULL vs an empty ('') varchar in SQL Server 2012 added 46 characters in body |
|
Oct 25 |
asked | Query performance of a NULL vs an empty ('') varchar in SQL Server 2012 |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Why is the install of SQL Server 2012 in Windows Server 2012 taking over previously accessible hard drive's? @AaronBertrand You could very well be right. My admin type experience with SQL Server is minimal. For some reason I was just thinking it'd be a cleaner setup to have those files on the root of those drives since I was dedicating the use of those drives to just those purposes. |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
Why is the install of SQL Server 2012 in Windows Server 2012 taking over previously accessible hard drive's? Well, not sure why this didn't come up in my googling last night (I was most likely too tired) but this does seem to be related to specifiying the root: connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/722545/… -- still would appreciate confirmation and any more insight offered here. Apologies for what appears to be an already answered question. |
|
Sep 26 |
asked | Why is the install of SQL Server 2012 in Windows Server 2012 taking over previously accessible hard drive's? |
|
Sep 26 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Sep 26 |
accepted | Optimal placement of tempdb, mdf and ldf files in SQL Server 2012 on SSD's? |
|
Sep 15 |
comment |
Optimal placement of tempdb, mdf and ldf files in SQL Server 2012 on SSD's? I appreciate the responses, all. I do have a follow-up question regarding "is it best to format the ssd to 64k blocks?", but I'm not familiar with the format here. Should I post that as a new question or is this ok here? |
|
Sep 15 |
comment |
Optimal placement of tempdb, mdf and ldf files in SQL Server 2012 on SSD's? Forgot to mention that piece--fault tolerance isn't a concern since the data is backed up in full, nightly, but it's mostly static data that I can easily replace even if backups weren't an option. The only dynamic data is mostly logging/auditing which is has no dependencies. Any small interruption in service I would have in cutting over to a backup, manually, is tolerable. |
|
Sep 14 |
awarded | Student |
|
Sep 14 |
asked | Optimal placement of tempdb, mdf and ldf files in SQL Server 2012 on SSD's? |
