Timeline for Group by's in materialized views and query planning [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2016 at 7:22 | history | closed |
ypercubeᵀᴹ Philᵀᴹ mustaccio LowlyDBA - John M Tom V |
Duplicate of What factors go into an Indexed View's Clustered Index being selected? | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:21 | history | edited | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 472 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:11 | history | edited | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 196 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:09 | vote | accept | John | ||
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:08 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 8, 2016 at 7:22 | |||||
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:50 | comment | added | John | @MartinSmith Similar, but I more interested in aggregates / group bys, which the linked question doesn't mention. (Read: please don't close this question.) | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:46 | comment | added | wBob | @MartinSmith, in a word, authoritative! : ) | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:38 | answer | added | wBob | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:35 | comment | added | Martin Smith | Duplicate of dba.stackexchange.com/q/26979/3690? | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 11:02 | comment | added | John | @wBob 2014, Developer Edition. | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 10:54 | comment | added | wBob | What edition are you using? eg Express, Standard, Enterprise | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:24 | comment | added | John | @ypercubeᵀᴹ Yes, that's what I tried. Indexed view wasn't used, sadly (according to the query plan). | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:22 | comment | added | ypercubeᵀᴹ | Ok, nice. Now did you try running the original query after the view and index was created? Was the index used or not? | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:14 | comment | added | John | @ypercubeᵀᴹ Fixed. Sorry about that. (I dry-wrote the question, the actual experiment was a bit ugly.) | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:12 | history | edited | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 9:10 | comment | added | ypercubeᵀᴹ |
The CREATE VIEW statement seems invalid, unless the table has only this one Slot column. Did you try it and it worked - with SELECT bt.* ... GROUP BY bt.Slot;; ?
|
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 8:57 | history | asked | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |