Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
electricsk8
Starting Member
3 Posts |
 Posted - 2009-07-06 : 11:10:46
|
| I am looking for performance tuning recommendations for a query that runs against a vendor-managed database. Unfortunately, because this is a vendor-managed database, I'm unable to apply index(es) / statistic(s) against the tables to optimize the execution plan. So, I need an alternative strategy that still provides me with the most efficient solution, and doesn't modify the existing database structure.Any ideas? |
|
|
vijayisonly
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1836 Posts |
Posted - 2009-07-06 : 11:48:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by electricsk8
I am looking for performance tuning recommendations for a query that runs against a vendor-managed database. Unfortunately, because this is a vendor-managed database, I'm unable to apply index(es) / statistic(s) against the tables to optimize the execution plan. So, I need an alternative strategy that still provides me with the most efficient solution, and doesn't modify the existing database structure.Any ideas?
You can start by posting the query here for recommendations? |
 |
|
|
electricsk8
Starting Member
3 Posts |
Posted - 2009-07-06 : 14:29:53
|
| thanks for the prompt response. I'm actually looking for a strategy, more than I am a specific answer ... the query is similar to the following, extremely straight-forward ... the issue is that the vendor(s) tables are not indexed properly to support this adhoc query / procedure definition, and i was wondering if anyone has come up with a clever solution ... Also, it's a sql server 2000 instance.select a.col1, a.col2, b.col1from tbl1 as ainner join tbl2 as bon a.col3 = b.col3where a.DateAsChar >= '20080101' |
|
|
|
vijayisonly
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1836 Posts |
Posted - 2009-07-06 : 15:34:46
|
| As you mentioned this looks pretty straight-forward. Whats the volume of data in tb1 and tbl2..if its not huge, I wouldn't worry about it. |
|
|
|
electricsk8
Starting Member
3 Posts |
Posted - 2009-07-06 : 16:13:13
|
| the core table is at 13,031,435 count. and it's a heap. there are many non-clustered (> 8) indexes on the table. i'm still trying to understand the reasoning behind this, as other tables in the database have clustered indexes defined. regardless, if there are any ideas they are welcomed. otherwise, i'll continue to limp along. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance Recommendations for Vendor Db