Search Results

Search found 5233 results on 210 pages for 'records'.

Page 54/210 | < Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >

  • SQL to have one specific record at the top, all others below

    - by superdario
    Hey all, I am trying to put together a query that will display one specific record (found by the record's primary ID) at the top, and display all other records below it, sorted by date (I have "date_added" as one of the fields in the table, in addition to primary ID). I could do this with a UNION (first select would locate the record I want, and the other select would display all other records), but I'm wondering if is there perhaps a better way? I'm using Oracle, by the way.

    Read the article

  • mysql rollback when auto commit is on

    - by devang
    hi, by mistake i fired a update query and all the records in the table in dat field got updated nd also cannot rollback as auto_commit is on..is der ny other way in which i can retreive the records.plz help its urgent.. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • RETS data fetching problem.

    - by Jimit
    Hello everyone, I am working on one real estate website which is Using RETS service to get the data to my local server. but I have one little bit problem here,I can fetch data from RETS which is having about 3lacks record in RETS Database but I didn't find the way,How can I fetch that all records in bunch of 50k at a time ? I didn't find any 'LIMIT' keyword on RETS.so how can I fetch without 'LIMIT' 50k records at a time? Please help me.

    Read the article

  • Query between SQL server and Client side

    - by Karim
    I create a query: Select * from HR_Tsalary where month='3' and year ='2010' the result is 473 records and I found 2 duplicate record, then I create another query to find duplicate record only: SELECT Emp_No, COUNT(*) FROM HR_Tsalary WHERE year = '10' AND month = '3'GROUP BY Emp_No HAVING COUNT(*) 1 the result is zero record from client side (thru Visual Basic Adodb code). But when I use same query from server the result is 2 records. Is there any different when create a query between from server side and client side?

    Read the article

  • postgres too slow

    - by Killercode
    Hi, I'm doing massive tests on a Postgres database... so basically I have 2 table where I inserted 40.000.000 records on, let's say table1 and 80.000.000 on table2 after this I deleted all those records. Now if I do SELECT * FROM table1 it takes 199000ms ? I can't understand what's happening? can anyone help me on this?

    Read the article

  • How can I set a default sort for tables in PHPMyAdmin (i.e. always "Primary key - Descending")

    - by jeremyclarke
    Even though its obnoxious in a lot of ways I use PHPMyAdmin all the time to debug database issues while writing PHP. By default it sorts tables by primary key ascending. 99% of the time I would rather have the newest data (my test data) shown at the top by default rather than the useless first few records ever saved. Is there a way to configure PHPMyAdmin to show the newest records by default? To alter similar behavior?

    Read the article

  • restoring with mysqldump, but where is the data?

    - by Ole Media
    Ok, so I'm in need to restore a table and I do: mysqldump --opt database table_name < table_name.sql I hit enter and Done! Well, not really, when I go to see if there is anything on the table it show 0 records. I have look into the table_name.sql and I see two records. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • proper way to use list to array?

    - by cometta
    public class TestClass{ private String divisions[] ={}; public void doAction(){ Collection testArray = new ArrayList(); // put testArray will data divisions = (String [] ) testArray.toArray(division); //should i use this divisions = (String [] ) testArray.toArray(new String [] {}); //should i use this? } } if i use case 1, and i call doaction multiple time, the division, something will show wrong records if i use case2, divisions will always show the correct records. is my assumption should use case 2?

    Read the article

  • nested sql statements

    - by Hadad
    Hello, I've a self join table when I delete or update it's id I want to delete or update all the direct and indirect affected records SQL server does not allow this type of cycle cascading I've decided to use triggers but this triggers will file recursively and they will be terminated at 34 level and I don't know the depth of records and event I disable the trigger and re enable it after completing the process how can I construct a SQL statement that achieve this logic?

    Read the article

  • Oracle - truncating a global temporary table

    - by superdario
    I am processing large amounts of data in iterations, each and iteration processes around 10-50 000 records. Because of such large number of records, I am inserting them into a global temporary table first, and then process it. Usually, each iteration takes 5-10 seconds. Would it be wise to truncate the global temporary table after each iteration so that each iteration can start off with an empty table? There are around 5000 iterations.

    Read the article

  • NUmber of rows in Oracle SQL Select?

    - by twelshesgi
    I need to nkw how many records were returned in a select in oracle. Currently, I do two queries: SELECT COUNT(ITEM_ID) FROM MY_ITEMS; SELECT * FROM MY_ITEMS; I need to know the COUNT but I hate doing two queries. Is there a way to do: SELECT * FROM MY_ITEMS and then find out how many records are in there?

    Read the article

  • Query interface for iPhone CoreData store

    - by JT
    Hi, another iPhone newbie question... I have the following: NSPersistentStoreCoordinator NSManagedObjectContext NSManagedObjectModel Is it possible to run queries directly on the store (since its a sqlite DB)? I'm trying to delete all the records from a tableview, and figured a "DELETE FROM table" would be nice and quick as opposed to looping through the records and removing them manually (which i'm also struggling with). Thanks for your time, James

    Read the article

  • Pass variables between separate instances of ruby (without writing to a text file or database)

    - by boulder_ruby
    Lets say I'm running a long worker-script in one of several open interactive rails consoles. The script is updating columns in a very, very, very large table of records. I've muted the ActiveRecord logger to speed up the process, and instruct the script to output some record of progress so I know how roughly how long the process is going to take. That is what I am currently doing and it would look something like this: ModelName.all.each_with_index do |r, i| puts i if i % 250 ...runs some process... r.save end Sometimes its two nested arrays running, such that there would be multiple iterators and other things running all at once. Is there a way that I could do something like this and access that variable from a separate rails console? (such that the variable would be overwritten every time the process is run without much slowdown) records = ModelName.all $total = records.count records.each_with_index do |r, i| $i = i ...runs some process... r.save end meanwhile mid-process in other console puts "#{($i/$total * 100).round(2)}% complete" #=> 67.43% complete I know passing global variables from one separate instance of ruby to the next doesn't work. I also just tried this to no effect as well unix console 1 $X=5 echo {$X} #=> 5 unix console 2 echo {$X} #=> "" Lastly, I also know using global variables like this is a major software design pattern no-no. I think that's reasonable, but I'd still like to know how to break that rule if I'd like. Writing to a text file obviously would work. So would writing to a separate database table or something. That's not a bad idea. But the really cool trick would be sharing a variable between two instances without writing to a text file or database column. What would this be called anyway? Tunneling? I don't quite know how to tag this question. Maybe bad-idea is one of them. But honestly design-patterns isn't what this question is about.

    Read the article

  • ListView: Display data divided into groups?

    - by jawonlee
    I would like to display the contents of a DataTable, divided into several groups depending on the value of one of the columns. So, if I have a DataTable (from SQL query) with: GroupID Name Description 1 foo bar 1 one two 2 some thing I would like to place all records containing GroupID 1 in one div, all records with GroupID 2 in another div, and so on. How can I do this? I'm writing in ASP.NET 4.0, with C# codebehind.

    Read the article

  • dns_get_record Question

    - by Batfan
    I am setting up a dns lookup form using dns_get_record. I set it up to check the A Record and MX Records of the domain that is input. However, I would like it to also display the IP address of the displayed MX Records. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Linux software RAID6: rebuild slow

    - by Ole Tange
    I am trying to find the bottleneck in the rebuilding of a software raid6. ## Pause rebuilding when measuring raw I/O performance # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max ## Drop caches so that does not interfere with measuring # sync ; echo 3 | tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches >/dev/null # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 7.30336 s, 144 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} skip=15000000 bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 12.7991 s, 81.9 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] So we can read sequentially at 140 MB/s in the outer tracks and 82 MB/s in the inner tracks on all the drives simultaneously. Sequential write performance is similar. This would lead me to expect a rebuild speed of 82 MB/s or more. # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max # cat /proc/mdstat md2 : active raid6 sdbd[10](S) sdbc[9] sdbf[0] sdbm[8] sdbl[7] sdbk[6] sdbe[11] sdbj[4] sdbi[3](F) sdbh[2] sdbg[1] 27349121408 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [9/8] [UUU_UUUUU] [=========>...........] recovery = 47.3% (1849905884/3907017344) finish=855.9min speed=40054K/sec But we only get 40 MB/s. And often this drops to 30 MB/s. # iostat -dkx 1 sdbc 0.00 8023.00 0.00 329.00 0.00 33408.00 203.09 0.70 2.12 1.06 34.80 sdbd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdbe 13.00 0.00 8334.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.01 0.65 0.08 0.06 47.20 sdbf 0.00 0.00 8348.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.00 0.58 0.07 0.06 48.00 sdbg 16.00 0.00 8331.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.02 0.71 0.09 0.06 48.80 sdbh 961.00 0.00 8314.00 0.00 37100.00 0.00 8.92 0.93 0.11 0.07 54.80 sdbj 70.00 0.00 8276.00 0.00 33384.00 0.00 8.07 0.78 0.10 0.06 48.40 sdbk 124.00 0.00 8221.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.12 0.88 0.11 0.06 47.20 sdbl 83.00 0.00 8262.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.08 0.96 0.12 0.06 47.60 sdbm 0.00 0.00 8344.00 0.00 33376.00 0.00 8.00 0.56 0.07 0.06 47.60 iostat says the disks are not 100% busy (but only 40-50%). This fits with the hypothesis that the max is around 80 MB/s. Since this is software raid the limiting factor could be CPU. top says: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 38520 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 64 0.0 2947:50 md2_raid6 6117 root 20 0 0 0 0 D 53 0.0 473:25.96 md2_resync So md2_raid6 and md2_resync are clearly busy taking up 64% and 53% of a CPU respectively, but not near 100%. The chunk size (128k) of the RAID was chosen after measuring which chunksize gave the least CPU penalty. If this speed is normal: What is the limiting factor? Can I measure that? If this speed is not normal: How can I find the limiting factor? Can I change that?

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Shrinking Database is Bad – Increases Fragmentation – Reduces Performance

    - by pinaldave
    Earlier, I had written two articles related to Shrinking Database. I wrote about why Shrinking Database is not good. SQL SERVER – SHRINKDATABASE For Every Database in the SQL Server SQL SERVER – What the Business Says Is Not What the Business Wants I received many comments on Why Database Shrinking is bad. Today we will go over a very interesting example that I have created for the same. Here are the quick steps of the example. Create a test database Create two tables and populate with data Check the size of both the tables Size of database is very low Check the Fragmentation of one table Fragmentation will be very low Truncate another table Check the size of the table Check the fragmentation of the one table Fragmentation will be very low SHRINK Database Check the size of the table Check the fragmentation of the one table Fragmentation will be very HIGH REBUILD index on one table Check the size of the table Size of database is very HIGH Check the fragmentation of the one table Fragmentation will be very low Here is the script for the same. USE MASTER GO CREATE DATABASE ShrinkIsBed GO USE ShrinkIsBed GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Create FirstTable CREATE TABLE FirstTable (ID INT, FirstName VARCHAR(100), LastName VARCHAR(100), City VARCHAR(100)) GO -- Create Clustered Index on ID CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_FirstTable_ID] ON FirstTable ( [ID] ASC ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Create SecondTable CREATE TABLE SecondTable (ID INT, FirstName VARCHAR(100), LastName VARCHAR(100), City VARCHAR(100)) GO -- Create Clustered Index on ID CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_SecondTable_ID] ON SecondTable ( [ID] ASC ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Insert One Hundred Thousand Records INSERT INTO FirstTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 100000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Insert One Hundred Thousand Records INSERT INTO SecondTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 100000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO Let us check the table size and fragmentation. Now let us TRUNCATE the table and check the size and Fragmentation. USE MASTER GO CREATE DATABASE ShrinkIsBed GO USE ShrinkIsBed GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Create FirstTable CREATE TABLE FirstTable (ID INT, FirstName VARCHAR(100), LastName VARCHAR(100), City VARCHAR(100)) GO -- Create Clustered Index on ID CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_FirstTable_ID] ON FirstTable ( [ID] ASC ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Create SecondTable CREATE TABLE SecondTable (ID INT, FirstName VARCHAR(100), LastName VARCHAR(100), City VARCHAR(100)) GO -- Create Clustered Index on ID CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_SecondTable_ID] ON SecondTable ( [ID] ASC ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Insert One Hundred Thousand Records INSERT INTO FirstTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 100000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Insert One Hundred Thousand Records INSERT INTO SecondTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 100000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO You can clearly see that after TRUNCATE, the size of the database is not reduced and it is still the same as before TRUNCATE operation. After the Shrinking database operation, we were able to reduce the size of the database. If you notice the fragmentation, it is considerably high. The major problem with the Shrink operation is that it increases fragmentation of the database to very high value. Higher fragmentation reduces the performance of the database as reading from that particular table becomes very expensive. One of the ways to reduce the fragmentation is to rebuild index on the database. Let us rebuild the index and observe fragmentation and database size. -- Rebuild Index on FirstTable ALTER INDEX IX_SecondTable_ID ON SecondTable REBUILD GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO You can notice that after rebuilding, Fragmentation reduces to a very low value (almost same to original value); however the database size increases way higher than the original. Before rebuilding, the size of the database was 5 MB, and after rebuilding, it is around 20 MB. Regular rebuilding the index is rebuild in the same user database where the index is placed. This usually increases the size of the database. Look at irony of the Shrinking database. One person shrinks the database to gain space (thinking it will help performance), which leads to increase in fragmentation (reducing performance). To reduce the fragmentation, one rebuilds index, which leads to size of the database to increase way more than the original size of the database (before shrinking). Well, by Shrinking, one did not gain what he was looking for usually. Rebuild indexing is not the best suggestion as that will create database grow again. I have always remembered the excellent post from Paul Randal regarding Shrinking the database is bad. I suggest every one to read that for accuracy and interesting conversation. Let us run following script where we Shrink the database and REORGANIZE. -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO -- Shrink the Database DBCC SHRINKDATABASE (ShrinkIsBed); GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO -- Rebuild Index on FirstTable ALTER INDEX IX_SecondTable_ID ON SecondTable REORGANIZE GO -- Name of the Database and Size SELECT name, (size*8) Size_KB FROM sys.database_files GO -- Check Fragmentations in the database SELECT avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), OBJECT_ID('SecondTable'), NULL, NULL, 'LIMITED') GO You can see that REORGANIZE does not increase the size of the database or remove the fragmentation. Again, I no way suggest that REORGANIZE is the solution over here. This is purely observation using demo. Read the blog post of Paul Randal. Following script will clean up the database -- Clean up USE MASTER GO ALTER DATABASE ShrinkIsBed SET SINGLE_USER WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE GO DROP DATABASE ShrinkIsBed GO There are few valid cases of the Shrinking database as well, but that is not covered in this blog post. We will cover that area some other time in future. Additionally, one can rebuild index in the tempdb as well, and we will also talk about the same in future. Brent has written a good summary blog post as well. Are you Shrinking your database? Well, when are you going to stop Shrinking it? Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Index, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLServer, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Puzzle – Statistics are not Updated but are Created Once

    - by pinaldave
    After having excellent response to my quiz – Why SELECT * throws an error but SELECT COUNT(*) does not?I have decided to ask another puzzling question to all of you. I am running this test on SQL Server 2008 R2. Here is the quick scenario about my setup. Create Table Insert 1000 Records Check the Statistics Now insert 10 times more 10,000 indexes Check the Statistics – it will be NOT updated Note: Auto Update Statistics and Auto Create Statistics for database is TRUE Expected Result – Statistics should be updated – SQL SERVER – When are Statistics Updated – What triggers Statistics to Update Now the question is why the statistics are not updated? The common answer is – we can update the statistics ourselves using UPDATE STATISTICS TableName WITH FULLSCAN, ALL However, the solution I am looking is where statistics should be updated automatically based on algorithm mentioned here. Now the solution is to ____________________. Vinod Kumar is not allowed to take participate over here as he is the one who has helped me to build this puzzle. I will publish the solution on next week. Please leave a comment and if your comment consist valid answer, I will publish with due credit. Here is the script to reproduce the scenario which I mentioned. -- Execution Plans Difference -- Create Sample Database CREATE DATABASE SampleDB GO USE SampleDB GO -- Create Table CREATE TABLE ExecTable (ID INT, FirstName VARCHAR(100), LastName VARCHAR(100), City VARCHAR(100)) GO -- Insert One Thousand Records -- INSERT 1 INSERT INTO ExecTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 1000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 7 THEN 'La Cinega' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 13 THEN 'San Diego' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 17 THEN 'Las Vegas' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Display statistics of the table - none listed sp_helpstats N'ExecTable', 'ALL' GO -- Select Statement SELECT FirstName, LastName, City FROM ExecTable WHERE City  = 'New York' GO -- Display statistics of the table sp_helpstats N'ExecTable', 'ALL' GO -- Replace your Statistics over here -- NOTE: Replace your _WA_Sys with stats from above query DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS('ExecTable', _WA_Sys_00000004_7D78A4E7); GO -------------------------------------------------------------- -- Round 2 -- Insert Ten Thousand Records -- INSERT 2 INSERT INTO ExecTable (ID,FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 10000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name) RowID, 'Bob', CASE WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 7 THEN 'La Cinega' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 13 THEN 'San Diego' WHEN  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%20 = 17 THEN 'Las Vegas' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Select Statement SELECT FirstName, LastName, City FROM ExecTable WHERE City  = 'New York' GO -- Display statistics of the table sp_helpstats N'ExecTable', 'ALL' GO -- Replace your Statistics over here -- NOTE: Replace your _WA_Sys with stats from above query DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS('ExecTable', _WA_Sys_00000004_7D78A4E7); GO -- You will notice that Statistics are still updated with 1000 rows -- Clean up Database DROP TABLE ExecTable GO USE MASTER GO ALTER DATABASE SampleDB SET SINGLE_USER WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE; GO DROP DATABASE SampleDB GO Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Index, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology Tagged: SQL Statistics, Statistics

    Read the article

  • July, the 31 Days of SQL Server DMO’s – Day 22 (sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats)

    - by Tamarick Hill
    The sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats Dynamic Management Function is used to return information about the fragmentation levels, page counts, depth, number of levels, record counts, etc. about the indexes on your database instance. One row is returned for each level in a given index, which we will discuss more later. The function takes a total of 5 input parameters which are (1) database_id, (2) object_id, (3) index_id, (4) partition_number, and (5) the mode of the scan level that you would like to run. Let’s use this function with our AdventureWorks2012 database to better illustrate the information it provides. SELECT * FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats(db_id('AdventureWorks2012'), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) As you can see from the result set, there is a lot of beneficial information returned from this DMF. The first couple of columns in the result set (database_id, object_id, index_id, partition_number, index_type_desc, alloc_unit_type_desc) are either self-explanatory or have been explained in our previous blog sessions so I will not go into detail about these at this time. The next column in the result set is the index_depth which represents how deep the index goes. For example, If we have a large index that contains 1 root page, 3 intermediate levels, and 1 leaf level, our index depth would be 5. The next column is the index_level which refers to what level (of the depth) a particular row is referring to. Next is probably one of the most beneficial columns in this result set, which is the avg_fragmentation_in_percent. This column shows you how fragmented a particular level of an index may be. Many people use this column within their index maintenance jobs to dynamically determine whether they should do REORG’s or full REBUILD’s of a given index. The fragment count represents the number of fragments in a leaf level while the avg_fragment_size_in_pages represents the number of pages in a fragment. The page_count column tells you how many pages are in a particular index level. From my result set above, you see the the remaining columns all have NULL values. This is because I did not specify a ‘mode’ in my query and as a result it used the ‘LIMITED’ mode by default. The LIMITED mode is meant to be lightweight so it does collect information for every column in the result set. I will re-run my query again using the ‘DETAILED’ mode and you will see we now have results for these rows. SELECT * FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats(db_id('AdventureWorks2012'), NULL, NULL, NULL, ‘DETAILED’)   From the remaining columns, you see we get even more detailed information such as how many records are in a particular index level (record_count). We have a column for ghost_record_count which represents the number of records that have been marked for deletion, but have not physically been removed by the background ghost cleanup process. We later see information on the MIN, MAX, and AVG record size in bytes. The forwarded_record_count column refers to records that have been updated and now no longer fit within the row on the page anymore and thus have to be moved. A forwarded record is left in the original location with a pointer to the new location. The last column in the result set is the compressed_page_count column which tells you how many pages in your index have been compressed. This is a very powerful DMF that returns good information about the current indexes in your system. However, based on the mode you select, it could be a very resource intensive function so be careful with how you use it. For more information on this Dynamic Management Function, please see the below Books Online link: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188917.aspx Follow me on Twitter @PrimeTimeDBA

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >