Comments on: A Simple Refactoring – Functions in the WHERE Clause http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause Jeremiah Peschka's ruminations on sql, ruby, c#, and other things Fri, 03 Sep 2010 21:05:14 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Weekly Link Post 133 « Rhonda Tipton’s WebLog http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause#comment-1159 Weekly Link Post 133 « Rhonda Tipton’s WebLog Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:44:15 +0000 http://facility9.com/?p=1350#comment-1159 [...] A Simple Refactoring – Functions in the WHERE Clause – “Putting functions in the where clause of a SQL Statement can cause performance problems.” [...] [...] A Simple Refactoring – Functions in the WHERE Clause – “Putting functions in the where clause of a SQL Statement can cause performance problems.” [...]

]]> By: Jeremiah Peschka http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause#comment-1156 Jeremiah Peschka Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:58:39 +0000 http://facility9.com/?p=1350#comment-1156 Hey Rob - thanks for taking the time to share some of your blog posts and especially your LiveMeeting for PASS in April! I'm aware that this is a contrived example. I was using this as a recipe to show a basic technique for developers who are getting started with SQL and looking to apply a simple refactoring to their T-SQL to make it run well. Hey Rob – thanks for taking the time to share some of your blog posts and especially your LiveMeeting for PASS in April!

I’m aware that this is a contrived example. I was using this as a recipe to show a basic technique for developers who are getting started with SQL and looking to apply a simple refactoring to their T-SQL to make it run well.

]]> By: Rob Farley http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause#comment-1155 Rob Farley Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:41:23 +0000 http://facility9.com/?p=1350#comment-1155 Sure, but it shouldn't matter in this particular case. Check my blogpost at http://msmvps.com/blogs/robfarley/archive/2010/01/22/sargable-functions-in-sql-server.aspx and the associated Connect item. But also, consider the fact that if you were doing a join between two tables, you might find that your query needed to have a function on a column in one of the tables. Moving it to the right doesn't help, because you're still telling the system that it can't consider the original form of one of the columns. I go into this in another recent post. http://msmvps.com/blogs/robfarley/archive/2010/02/02/a-case-study-in-sargability.aspx And in fact, will be covering this in a LiveMeeting session in April: http://www.sqlpass.org/Events/ctl/ViewEvent/mid/521.aspx?ID=334 Sure, but it shouldn’t matter in this particular case. Check my blogpost at http://msmvps.com/blogs/robfarley/archive/2010/01/22/sargable-functions-in-sql-server.aspx and the associated Connect item.

But also, consider the fact that if you were doing a join between two tables, you might find that your query needed to have a function on a column in one of the tables. Moving it to the right doesn’t help, because you’re still telling the system that it can’t consider the original form of one of the columns. I go into this in another recent post.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/robfarley/archive/2010/02/02/a-case-study-in-sargability.aspx

And in fact, will be covering this in a LiveMeeting session in April: http://www.sqlpass.org/Events/ctl/ViewEvent/mid/521.aspx?ID=334

]]> By: Jeremiah Peschka http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause#comment-1154 Jeremiah Peschka Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:56:53 +0000 http://facility9.com/?p=1350#comment-1154 Thanks for spotting that. I've updated the post. I must have missed that while fighting with the syntax highlighter. Thanks for spotting that. I’ve updated the post. I must have missed that while fighting with the syntax highlighter.

]]> By: Nighthawk http://facility9.com/2010/02/17/a-simple-refactoring-functions-in-the-where-clause#comment-1153 Nighthawk Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:45:34 +0000 http://facility9.com/?p=1350#comment-1153 Your 2nd option is incorrect; since the dates are inverted so should the offset. It should be "... DATEADD(MM, -2, ..." Your 2nd option is incorrect; since the dates are inverted so should the offset. It should be “… DATEADD(MM, -2, …”

]]>