tens-of-thousands, or hundreds-of-thousands of rows to determine what to
update is going to be painful, and actually updating that many rows is
going to hurt.
I'm not sure what your application & table design are, but I suspect
there might be a better way to build this mousetrap to make things run
smoother...
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Weikert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 15:58
To: SQL
Subject: RE: Big honkin' query gettin' me down!
At 02:52 PM 5/14/2004, you wrote:
>How many rows in table1 and table2?
As stated in the original mail... between 410k and 420k. And most (all
but
a few thousand) are going to have matching records (didn't mention that
originally, I fear).
Again, blargh. :/
I'm pondering putting in an extra qualifier, i.e. to pick up only the
matching records that start with 'a', then 'b', etc. and make it run a
bunch of smaller updates instead of one big honkin' one...
________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
