29,823 reputation
874126
bio website
location United Kingdom
age
visits member for 3 years, 4 months
seen 7 hours ago

Email: stackoverflowmartinsmith@gmail.com


Oct
12
awarded  Custodian
Oct
12
reviewed Reviewed When should I think about upgrading our RDS MySQL instance based on memory usage?
Oct
11
awarded  Enlightened
Oct
11
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
10
comment SQL Server 2008 datetime index performance bug
What does the slow execution plan look like? Parameter sniffing?
Oct
8
comment To use or not use ISNULL(NULLIF(Field1, ''))?
Similar question to Performance difference for COALESCE versus ISNULL?. The same points about possible different result datatypes and possible double evaluation of the expression with CASE still apply.
Oct
7
comment How to run 2 separate sql server engines on the same server?
You can install more than one instance of SQL Server on a machine. What is the nature of the performance issues?
Oct
7
awarded  Good Answer
Oct
5
revised How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
added 904 characters in body
Oct
5
comment How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
I see your point I was focusing specifically on the "would it be executed" part of the question and neglected the "would it be a good idea" part. Editing now.
Oct
5
comment How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
For the case given in the OP a filter with startup predicate seems quite common though.
Oct
5
comment How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
@AlexKuznetsov - Agreed. They probably need UNION ALL and even if they don't and the DISTINCT semantics are actually desired they might get a better plan having DISTINCT in the two individual queries.
Oct
5
comment How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
Just because it is in the plan doesn't mean it is executed though.
Oct
5
answered How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
Oct
5
comment How does the T-SQL optimizer handle “and false”
Look at the actual execution plans. See if there is a filter with a startup predicate and "number of executions" is zero for the operators on the part of the plan that should be excluded.
Oct
5
comment SSMS Tools Pack Alternative
@AndreiRantsevich - The only thing that springs to mind at the moment is probably something few other people apart from me would find useful. I would like a way to export the execution plan as an image with some of the operator properties annotated onto the image. I'll probably have a go at that myself.
Oct
5
revised SSMS Tools Pack Alternative
Removed redundant check that means event would only be wired up on first run
Oct
4
comment SSMS Tools Pack Alternative
@AndreiRantsevich - I'm sure yours will be much more full featured! I just wanted an excuse to play with Addins.
Oct
4
revised SSMS Tools Pack Alternative
added 608 characters in body
Oct
3
answered SSMS Tools Pack Alternative