Help for Fine Tune Store procedure to increase its performance

I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
help me to fine tune this store procedure.
CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
@.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
@.VoyageCode varchar(10),
@.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
@.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
@.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
AS
select distinct t.ContainerNo,
T.ContainerType,
(select BookingNote
from trnActivity TA
inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
TA.LinerCode
where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and DO is not Null
and TA.ActivityDate =
(select Max(activityDate ) from
trnActivity TB
where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
t.ImpVesselCode ,
t.ImpVoyageCode ,
t.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
union
select
c.ContainerNo,
c.ContainerType,
c.BookingNote,
c.ImpVesselCode ,
c.ImpVoyageCode ,
c.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
GO
-- --
Thanks in advance
Please also post DDL (CREATE TABLE statements, including constraints and
indexes). The underlying schema can affect query performance significantly.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Nitu" <Nitu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05229BAA-ABA5-4C85-A298-616D82F629D3@.microsoft.com...
>I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
>
> -- --
> Thanks in advance
|||Nitu,
You should post the DDL, including all indexes, that is key. Also, ask
yourself if you really need to handle NULL values in VesselCode and/or
VoyageCode, because the use of ISNULL() will disallow the use of an
index for those columns.
Gert-Jan
Nitu wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance
|||On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance
Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
into #my_temp
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
insert #mytemp
select distinct
c.ContainerNo etc...
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =
c. ContainerNo
and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
BookingNote = c. BookingNote
and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
ReleaseRefNo )
That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
updates statements.
|||> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
> select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
> into #my_temp
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> insert #mytemp
> select distinct
> c.ContainerNo etc...
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =
> c. ContainerNo
> and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
> BookingNote = c. BookingNote
> and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
> ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
> ReleaseRefNo )
>
> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
>
|||On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
> underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
> improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
> kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
> non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
> and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "SB" <othell...@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.
|||With all due respect SB, if you want to provide real help to the OP you DO
need schema, indexes and possibly even data distribution information. Your
stab in the dark could well be WORSE performing due the large I/O overhead
associated with temporary tables (and the sproc recompiles associated with
them too). Even worse is that it completely avoids the possibility that a
single appropriate index addition could improve the sproc performance 1-4
orders of magnitude.
We on this forum should strive to give posters the right tools to help them
in the future as well as simply attempting to solve their current problem.
With just a bit more information from the OP we could have a dialog that
provided good mentoring to all while providing the BEST solution to Nitu.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185852523.248498.24130@.d55g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
> online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.
>

Help for Fine Tune Store procedure to increase its performance

I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
help me to fine tune this store procedure.
--
CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
@.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
@.VoyageCode varchar(10),
@.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
@.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
@.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
AS
select distinct t.ContainerNo,
T.ContainerType,
(select BookingNote
from trnActivity TA
inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner = TA.LinerCode
where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and DO is not Null
and TA.ActivityDate = (select Max(activityDate ) from
trnActivity TB
where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
t.ImpVesselCode ,
t.ImpVoyageCode ,
t.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
union
select
c.ContainerNo,
c.ContainerType,
c.BookingNote,
c.ImpVesselCode ,
c.ImpVoyageCode ,
c.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
GO
-- --
Thanks in advancePlease also post DDL (CREATE TABLE statements, including constraints and
indexes). The underlying schema can affect query performance significantly.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Nitu" <Nitu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05229BAA-ABA5-4C85-A298-616D82F629D3@.microsoft.com...
>I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner => TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate => (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
>
> -- --
> Thanks in advance|||Nitu,
You should post the DDL, including all indexes, that is key. Also, ask
yourself if you really need to handle NULL values in VesselCode and/or
VoyageCode, because the use of ISNULL() will disallow the use of an
index for those columns.
Gert-Jan
Nitu wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner => TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate => (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance|||On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner => TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate => (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance
Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
into #my_temp
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
insert #mytemp
select distinct
c.ContainerNo etc...
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =c. ContainerNo
and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
BookingNote = c. BookingNote
and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
ReleaseRefNo )
That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
updates statements.|||> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
>> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any
>> one
>> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
>> --
>> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
>> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
>> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
>> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
>> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
>> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
>> AS
>> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
>> T.ContainerType,
>> (select BookingNote
>> from trnActivity TA
>> inner join trnReleasenote RA on
>> RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =>> TA.LinerCode
>> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
>> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
>> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') =>> isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
>> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') =>> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
>> and DO is not Null
>> and TA.ActivityDate =>> (select Max(activityDate ) from
>> trnActivity TB
>> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
>> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
>> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') =>> isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
>> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') =>> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
>> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
>> t.ImpVesselCode ,
>> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
>> t.ReleaseRefNo
>> from trnExpTracking t
>> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
>> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
>> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> union
>> select
>> c.ContainerNo,
>> c.ContainerType,
>> c.BookingNote,
>> c.ImpVesselCode ,
>> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
>> c.ReleaseRefNo
>> from trnExpContainerDetail c
>> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
>> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
>> GO
>> -- --
>> Thanks in advance
> Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
> select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
> into #my_temp
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> insert #mytemp
> select distinct
> c.ContainerNo etc...
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo => c. ContainerNo
> and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
> BookingNote = c. BookingNote
> and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
> ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
> ReleaseRefNo )
>
> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
>|||On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> > that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> > tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> > updates statements.
> SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
> underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
> improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
> kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
> non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
> and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "SB" <othell...@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> >> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any
> >> one
> >> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> >> --
> >> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> >> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> >> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> >> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> >> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> >> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> >> AS
> >> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> >> T.ContainerType,
> >> (select BookingNote
> >> from trnActivity TA
> >> inner join trnReleasenote RA on
> >> RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner => >> TA.LinerCode
> >> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> >> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> >> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') => >> isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> >> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') => >> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> >> and DO is not Null
> >> and TA.ActivityDate => >> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> >> trnActivity TB
> >> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> >> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> >> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') => >> isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> >> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') => >> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> >> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> >> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> >> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> >> t.ReleaseRefNo
> >> from trnExpTracking t
> >> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> >> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> >> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> >> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> >> union
> >> select
> >> c.ContainerNo,
> >> c.ContainerType,
> >> c.BookingNote,
> >> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> >> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> >> c.ReleaseRefNo
> >> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> >> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> >> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> >> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> >> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> >> GO
> >> -- --
> >> Thanks in advance
> > Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
> > select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
> > into #my_temp
> > from trnExpTracking t
> > --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> > where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> > and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> > and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> > insert #mytemp
> > select distinct
> > c.ContainerNo etc...
> > from trnExpContainerDetail c
> > where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> > and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> > and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> > and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> > and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo => > c. ContainerNo
> > and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
> > BookingNote = c. BookingNote
> > and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
> > ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
> > ReleaseRefNo )
> > That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> > that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> > tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> > updates statements.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.|||With all due respect SB, if you want to provide real help to the OP you DO
need schema, indexes and possibly even data distribution information. Your
stab in the dark could well be WORSE performing due the large I/O overhead
associated with temporary tables (and the sproc recompiles associated with
them too). Even worse is that it completely avoids the possibility that a
single appropriate index addition could improve the sproc performance 1-4
orders of magnitude.
We on this forum should strive to give posters the right tools to help them
in the future as well as simply attempting to solve their current problem.
With just a bit more information from the OP we could have a dialog that
provided good mentoring to all while providing the BEST solution to Nitu.
--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185852523.248498.24130@.d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
> online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
>> > that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
>> > tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
>> > updates statements.
>> SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
>> underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
>> improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
>> kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
>> non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to
>> understand
>> and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
>> --
>> Hope this helps.
>> Dan Guzman
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "SB" <othell...@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes
>> >> to
>> >> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any
>> >> one
>> >> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
>> >> --
>> >> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
>> >> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
>> >> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
>> >> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
>> >> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
>> >> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
>> >> AS
>> >> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
>> >> T.ContainerType,
>> >> (select BookingNote
>> >> from trnActivity TA
>> >> inner join trnReleasenote RA on
>> >> RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =>> >> TA.LinerCode
>> >> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
>> >> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
>> >> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') =>> >> isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
>> >> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') =>> >> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
>> >> and DO is not Null
>> >> and TA.ActivityDate =>> >> (select Max(activityDate ) from
>> >> trnActivity TB
>> >> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
>> >> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
>> >> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') =>> >> isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
>> >> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') =>> >> isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
>> >> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
>> >> t.ImpVesselCode ,
>> >> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
>> >> t.ReleaseRefNo
>> >> from trnExpTracking t
>> >> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
>> >> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> >> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
>> >> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> >> union
>> >> select
>> >> c.ContainerNo,
>> >> c.ContainerType,
>> >> c.BookingNote,
>> >> c.ImpVesselCode ,
>> >> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
>> >> c.ReleaseRefNo
>> >> from trnExpContainerDetail c
>> >> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> >> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> >> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
>> >> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
>> >> GO
>> >> -- --
>> >> Thanks in advance
>> > Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
>> > select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
>> > into #my_temp
>> > from trnExpTracking t
>> > --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
>> > where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> > and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
>> > and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> > insert #mytemp
>> > select distinct
>> > c.ContainerNo etc...
>> > from trnExpContainerDetail c
>> > where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
>> > and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
>> > and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
>> > and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
>> > and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =>> > c. ContainerNo
>> > and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
>> > BookingNote = c. BookingNote
>> > and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
>> > ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
>> > ReleaseRefNo )
>> > That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
>> > that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
>> > tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
>> > updates statements.- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.
>

Help for Fine Tune Store procedure to increase its performance

I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
help me to fine tune this store procedure.
--
CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
@.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
@.VoyageCode varchar(10),
@.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
@.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
@.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
AS
select distinct t.ContainerNo,
T.ContainerType,
(select BookingNote
from trnActivity TA
inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
TA.LinerCode
where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and DO is not Null
and TA.ActivityDate =
(select Max(activityDate ) from
trnActivity TB
where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
t.ImpVesselCode ,
t.ImpVoyageCode ,
t.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
union
select
c.ContainerNo,
c.ContainerType,
c.BookingNote,
c.ImpVesselCode ,
c.ImpVoyageCode ,
c.ReleaseRefNo
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
GO
-- --
Thanks in advancePlease also post DDL (CREATE TABLE statements, including constraints and
indexes). The underlying schema can affect query performance significantly.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Nitu" <Nitu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05229BAA-ABA5-4C85-A298-616D82F629D3@.microsoft.com...
>I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode = TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselCode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoyageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
>
> -- --
> Thanks in advance|||Nitu,
You should post the DDL, including all indexes, that is key. Also, ask
yourself if you really need to handle NULL values in VesselCode and/or
VoyageCode, because the use of ISNULL() will disallow the use of an
index for those columns.
Gert-Jan
Nitu wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode
= TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesse
lcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoy
ageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselC
ode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVo
yageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance|||On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I want to change following store procedure, it takes around 5 minutes to
> execute & I calls for each vessel / voyage combination... , Could any one
> help me to fine tune this store procedure.
> --
> CREATE PROCEDURE get_ContainerListinExpBL
> @.VesselCode varchar(10) ,
> @.VoyageCode varchar(10),
> @.LinerCode varchar(10) ,
> @.BookingList varchar(1000) = null ,
> @.BLNumber varchar(20) = null
> AS
> select distinct t.ContainerNo,
> T.ContainerType,
> (select BookingNote
> from trnActivity TA
> inner join trnReleasenote RA on RA.ReleaseNoteCode
= TA.DO and RA.Liner =
> TA.LinerCode
> where TA.ContainerNo = T.ContainerNo
> and TA.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TA.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesse
lcode ,'')
> and isnull(TA.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVoy
ageCode, '')
> and DO is not Null
> and TA.ActivityDate =
> (select Max(activityDate ) from
> trnActivity TB
> where TB.ContainerNo = t.ContainerNo
> and TB.LinerCode = t.LinerCode
> and isnull(TB.VesselCode,'') = isnull(t.ImpVesselC
ode , '')
> and isnull(TB.VoyageCode, '') = isnull(t.ImpVo
yageCode, '')
> and TB.DO is not null)) BookingNote ,
> t.ImpVesselCode ,
> t.ImpVoyageCode ,
> t.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> union
> select
> c.ContainerNo,
> c.ContainerType,
> c.BookingNote,
> c.ImpVesselCode ,
> c.ImpVoyageCode ,
> c.ReleaseRefNo
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> GO
> -- --
> Thanks in advance
Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
into #my_temp
from trnExpTracking t
--inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
insert #mytemp
select distinct
c.ContainerNo etc...
from trnExpContainerDetail c
where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =
c. ContainerNo
and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
BookingNote = c. BookingNote
and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
ReleaseRefNo )
That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
updates statements.|||> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 28, 2:14 pm, Nitu <N...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Hi, try removing the union and use a temp table instead. For example:
> select distinct t.ContainerNo etc...
> into #my_temp
> from trnExpTracking t
> --inner join mstISO O on O.ContainerType = T.ContainerType
> where t.ExpVesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and t.ExpVoyagecode = @.VoyageCode
> and t.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> insert #mytemp
> select distinct
> c.ContainerNo etc...
> from trnExpContainerDetail c
> where C.LinerCode = @.LinerCode
> and C.VesselCode = @.VesselCode
> and C.VoyageCode = @.VoyageCode
> and C.BLnumber = @.BLnumber
> and not exists (select 1 from #my_temp where #my_temp. ContainerNo =
> c. ContainerNo
> and #my_temp. ContainerType = c. ContainerType and #my_temp.
> BookingNote = c. BookingNote
> and #my_temp. ImpVesselCode = c. ImpVesselCode and #my_temp.
> ImpVoyageCode = c. ImpVoyageCode and #my_temp. ReleaseRefNo = c.
> ReleaseRefNo )
>
> That should move the timetable to less than 5 minutes to run. I think
> that is acceptable. You can fine tune it further by using more #temp
> tables for inner subqueries and joining them with #my_temp using
> updates statements.
>|||On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> SB, how can you make these recommendations without knowledge of the
> underlying schema? I'm not saying that employing a temp tables won't
> improve performance, it's just that I've often seen temp tables used as a
> kludge workaround when the real issue is lack of useful indexes and
> non-saragable query expressions. IMHO, a better approach is to understand
> and address the underlying cause for the poor performance.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "SB" <othell...@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1185777942.351695.318730@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.|||With all due respect SB, if you want to provide real help to the OP you DO
need schema, indexes and possibly even data distribution information. Your
stab in the dark could well be WORSE performing due the large I/O overhead
associated with temporary tables (and the sproc recompiles associated with
them too). Even worse is that it completely avoids the possibility that a
single appropriate index addition could improve the sproc performance 1-4
orders of magnitude.
We on this forum should strive to give posters the right tools to help them
in the future as well as simply attempting to solve their current problem.
With just a bit more information from the OP we could have a dialog that
provided good mentoring to all while providing the BEST solution to Nitu.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"SB" <othellomy@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185852523.248498.24130@.d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 30, 6:35 pm, "Dan Guzman" <guzma...@.nospam-
> online.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Dan I don't need schema. If I need one I will ask tl from you. Thanks.
>

help constructing a headache query...

I have two tables, both with phone numbers and call times.

one is for incoming calls, one for outgoing calls.

I need to find all phone numbers from the incoming calls table where the number of calls exceeds 100 within the last 30 days, where the last call was within the last 15 mins, and where the number does Not exist in the outgoing call table within the last 30 days.

so far I have this...
(call record is the incoming, callout is the outgoin)

I believe this is giving me all records in the call record table that are within the last month, and not in the outgoing call table OR have not ben called within the last month..

SELECT cr.cli,min(cr.starttime)as "first call",max(cr.starttime)as "last call",count(cr.cli) as "number of calls"
FROM callrecord cr
LEFT JOIN callout co
ON cr.cli = co.cli
where (co.cli is null or datediff(dy,co.calltime,getdate())>30 )
and datediff(dy,cr.starttime,getdate())>30
group by cr.cli
order by cr.cli

i need to add in the 15 minute call check, and also only return those with a count of > 100

can anyone assist? i'm getting a headache :D

tia

aHi

Untested aircode but perhaps:


SELECT cr.cli,min(cr.starttime)as "first call",max(cr.starttime)as "last call",count(cr.cli) as "number of calls"
FROM callrecord cr
LEFT JOIN (SELECT cli FROM callout WHERE datediff(dy,co.calltime,getdate())>30) co
ON cr.cli = co.cli
where co.cli is null
group by cr.cli
HAVING COUNT(DISTINCT cr.Cli) >100 AND DATEDIFF(n ,MAX(cr.endtime), getdate()) <=15
order by cr.cli

I've assumed there is an end time to the calls that this is when the clock starts ticking...|||there isn't an endtime in these tables.. the call duration isn't relevant, only that a call was made within the last 15 mins, and that the nuimber of calls over the last 30 days have exceeded 100.

that does seem to return a better resultset...

I'll have a look.. thanks :D

a|||there isn't an endtime in these tables.. the call duration isn't relevant, only that a call was made within the last 15 mins, and that the nuimber of calls over the last 30 days have exceeded 100.

Ah - in that case replace the end time with the start time (obviously - reckon you probably figured that :D )|||Select
CallIn.cli
,CallIn.firstcall
,CallIn.lastcall
,CallIn.numberofcalls
from
(
SELECT
cr.cli
,min(cr.starttime)as "firstcall"
,max(cr.starttime)as "lastcall"
,count(cr.cli) as "numberofcalls"
FROM
callrecord cr
where
datediff(dy,cr.starttime,getdate())>30
group by
cr.cli
having
count(cr.cli) > 100 and max(cr.starttime) > dateadd(mi,-15,getdate())
) CallIn
LEFT JOIN callout co
ON callin.cli = co.cli
where (co.cli is null or datediff(dy,co.calltime,getdate())>30 )
Here You go ...

Help batch script task stuck in a loop

I have a .bat file that calls a script file to log in to a server and upload a file to my pub account. When I run the .bat file it just executes the command over and over and never executes the script file. Does anyone know why? Am I missing something in my script or .bat file commands below?

my .bat file contains this>ftp -s:script.txt

my script file contains this:

open myserver.com
username
password
put W:\UPLOAD\doc.txt
bye
exit

Thanks,

Mike

Looping doesn't seem reminiscent of the batch file or the script you have listed here. I sounds like it may be due to some logic in your package. Any chance this is happening in your package?|||

It works now.

|||

Mike,

I have the same problem, can you post the solution?

Thanks.

Sebastian.

|||

Instead of using the batch file, I used a ftp script and called it using the Execute Process Task Editor:

Executable: C:\WINDOWS\system32\ftp.exe

Arguments: -s:"C:\Documents and Settings\me\Desktop\SQL 2005 DMS project-Prod\Download E-Apps\ftpscript.txt"

the ftpscript.txt file contains the following:

open hostname
me
password
Ascii
put filepath\name
bye
exit

sql

Help batch script task stuck in a loop

I have a .bat file that calls a script file to log in to a server and upload a file to my pub account. When I run the .bat file it just executes the command over and over and never executes the script file. Does anyone know why? Am I missing something in my script or .bat file commands below?

my .bat file contains this>ftp -s:script.txt

my script file contains this:

open myserver.com
username
password
put W:\UPLOAD\doc.txt
bye
exit

Thanks,

Mike

Looping doesn't seem reminiscent of the batch file or the script you have listed here. I sounds like it may be due to some logic in your package. Any chance this is happening in your package?|||

It works now.

|||

Mike,

I have the same problem, can you post the solution?

Thanks.

Sebastian.

|||

Instead of using the batch file, I used a ftp script and called it using the Execute Process Task Editor:

Executable: C:\WINDOWS\system32\ftp.exe

Arguments: -s:"C:\Documents and Settings\me\Desktop\SQL 2005 DMS project-Prod\Download E-Apps\ftpscript.txt"

the ftpscript.txt file contains the following:

open hostname
me
password
Ascii
put filepath\name
bye
exit

Help - Tasks that have circular dependencies

Hello,

I have a package, which calls a sub package to poulate a table depending on a flag in the database (using an ExecuteSQL task to return flagged table name).

The inner package populates some tables, and calculates what needs to be processed next. It sets the next flag.

However, I can't make this work in the control flow, as once the Execute package has completed, I need to start again from the top, as the flag will have changed to the next item.

I hope that I have explained this well enough.

I really need this to work, but SSIS will not let me create a circular dependency. Does anyone know a way around this, or can offer me an alternative solution?

I am getting desperate, so any suggestions will be welcome

Many thanks

The Foreach Loop Container may be of use. have you evaluated that?

Regards

-Jamie

|||

Hello Jamie,

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, I have, but as I have to pass it a recordset at the start of the for each.. it doesn't seem to fit the bill. I have to pick up these tables in an order only defined at run time by the sub package.

|||The Foreach container is exactly what you need to use. You will need to store your recordset in a user variable using an ExecuteSQL task and then use the Foreach container with a Foreach ADO enumerator. More direction is available on BOL but that should be enough to get you started.|||

Oh dear,

I am not explaining this very well, I;m sorry.

On the first pass I will get a table name from ny ontrol table which beeds to be populated. Once this is populated, I will mark the parent tables next to be processed in my control table.

So on the second iteration, I need to retrieve a new recordset to pass to the For Each loop. And so on.

Sorry if I am being obtuse, but I can't see how I can make this work.

HELP - Need a very quick code sample for calling report

Hi - any help would be tremendously appreciated.

I have been asked to create a quick project that calls a report from a hyperlink and need just a very basic way to do so.

The report is published to a SRS Server so all I need to be able to do is have a hypelink that will show the report on screen

Thanks in advance for any help

Rendering a Report using URL Access

If the info above is not sufficient you can google for the above keywords and am sure you will find what you need.

|||

If you need more detail, the full syntax is available athttp://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/RSPROG/htm/rsp_prog_urlaccess_7kbq.asp

The basic syntax is

http://server/virtualroot?[/pathinfo]&prefix:param=value[&prefix:param=value]...n]

sohttp://reportbox/reportserver?/CorpReports/SalesSummary&rs:Command=Render&rs:format=HTML4.0

wouldrender theSalesSummary report in theCorpReports folder on thereportserver vroot on thereportbox server inHTML 4.0 format

Help -- How do I exit a Foreach Loop

I have a foreach loop that is processing files in a directory. One of the tasks is the execute sql task that calls a stored proc. If this stored proc returns a certain value then I need to exit the loop and not process any more files. But I have been unable to figure out how to make this happen.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

GN

Hi,

I am not sure whether this will work or not. But just try. In the 'Foreach loop' container, select 'Expressions' tab and assign a boolean variable to the propery 'Disable'. Then based on the result, when required, set the value of the variable to 'True'. If it does not work, try this option for 'ForceExectionResult' also.

Let me know if any one of it works.

|||

GN wrote:

I have a foreach loop that is processing files in a directory. One of the tasks is the execute sql task that calls a stored proc. If this stored proc returns a certain value then I need to exit the loop and not process any more files. But I have been unable to figure out how to make this happen.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

GN

have you considered using the script task instead?|||

Place the workflow in a sequence inside the ForEach Loop.

Place a script task at the beginning of the loop with a precedence constraint going to the sequence.

Place an expression on the precedence constraint to only execute if a variable is true, call the variable, "ExecuteBody". ExecuteBody==true

Set op to expression only

When the loop should terminate, set the ExecuteBody variable to false. The loop will traverse the entire remaining collection, but because there is nothing to execute, it will rip through it extremely fast and terminate.

K