Wednesday, Septem10:46:39 AM - Eduardo Pivaral One possible approach is to generate a sequential id, guarateed to start from 1, using ROW_NUMBER() I think if there are gaps in the ID column fo the table being updated, this approach will fail.įor example MyTestTable does not contain any records with ID 1 - 1000000, but the ID starts from 1000001, there will be no updates performed. SET TOP 1 id FROM MyTestTable WHERE dataInt > = > 0)ĪND id > id Then no Updates with happen Sunday, Septem9:19:00 PM - Vidyasagar Dussa When you don't performance issues will not disappear just because you are batching. I was kind of dissapointed not to see a delay. If you have performance issues with a query, this is not related to the batch process, but the query itself. Why add extra computing time to a process? I don't consider adding a delay in a batch process a best practice, that is why I did not mention it. Thursday, Octo4:24:12 PM - Eduardo Pivaral Just now that this could slow down some processes, especially If you want to implement an “execution log” you can achieve this by adding.Table having all the records to work with and update accordingly. Use of this approach) and you can achieve this with a “control” It also supports multi-statement processes (in fact, this is the real-world. So already processed rows can be skipped if you decide to cancel the execution.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |