The Forum has been Updated
The code has been upgraded to the latest .NET core version. Please check instructions in the Community Announcements about migrating your account.
Is there an easy way of like getting latest x number of topics but only 1 topic per author of topic or instead of author not having same title of topics (like spammed ones)? Like not gettings "SiSL"'s 3 topics if he opened 3 of last 10 topics but 1 topic from SiSL and rest 1 topic per author... with Topic ID's and such for SQL Server?
Posted
This was fun, now to get back to work 
. Of course, I am hoping no one noticed that I contradicted myself and ended up solving it all with a very, very, simple (
) SQL statement.
. Of course, I am hoping no one noticed that I contradicted myself and ended up solving it all with a very, very, simple () SQL statement.
Posted
well, to be honest four nested selects isn't exactly simple 
Posted
Originally posted by HuwRIt's not simple ?!!
well, to be honest four nested selects isn't exactly simple
I promise I wrote them one at a time
.
Posted
I still think my first attempt was the simplest I just should have dropped the #TempTopics table after doing the select
I just should have dropped the #TempTopics table after doing the select
Posted
From an execution point of view, I tested both ways with a database from a live Snitz forum and your option had a higher subtree cost (0,8 vs. 3.17) and a higher number of scans and logical reads (rather big difference here). Probably a disadvantage on a high traffic forum.
I had performed a similar comparison before, with Snitz too (query performance has always been of interest to me) and using derived tables wasn't actually faster than using temporary tables, probably because the number of records involved was much higher. I thought it was interesting to compare it in this situation.
This is fun, but I have already spent 2 or 3 hours with this. I better go do something more boring.
I had performed a similar comparison before, with Snitz too (query performance has always been of interest to me) and using derived tables wasn't actually faster than using temporary tables, probably because the number of records involved was much higher. I thought it was interesting to compare it in this situation.
This is fun, but I have already spent 2 or 3 hours with this. I better go do something more boring
.
Posted
yes, I ought to finish what I was doing beore getting side tracked.