|
|
Posted by David Portas on 03/29/06 16:43
T.H.N. wrote:
> I'm trying to work out a database design to make it quicker for my client
> program to read and display updates to the data set. Currently it reads in
> the entire data set again after each change, which was acceptable when the
> data set was small but now it's large enough to start causing noticable
> delays. I've come up with a possible solution but am looking for others'
> input on its suitability to the problem.
Use stored procedures for your updates, inserts, deletes and selects.
As far as I can see you aren't doing that now. Is there a reason why
not?
If you use procs then you won't need the triggers, you probably won't
need two tables and you'll probably see a performance improvement along
with all the other benefits of procs.
Thanks for including the DDL. Always tell us what version you are using
as well - it does help.
--
David Portas, SQL Server MVP
Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem.
Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps.
State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content
of any error messages.
SQL Server Books Online:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx
--
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|