Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 06/19/18 11:47

sql_server_user (kaioptera@gmail.com) writes:
> I reclustered the table and the query is of course much faster now. I
> need to keep both versions of the table around for a while to see how
> they compare for all the queries we run, so I have an insert trigger
> keeping them in sync.

Good to hear that it worked out.

> I tried the other permutations of the query you suggested, Erland, and
> they had no effect on the execution plan or performance.

Good! This indicates that the query might be stable. :-) I've experienced
situations where such "meaningless" permuation affected the query plan,
so I wanted you to try all three.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx

• Next in forum: Re: Select several values into a single variable
• Prev in forum: Re: SQL2005 collation vs Oracle
• Thread view: Re: Multicolumn correlated subquery?

[Reply to this message]