Author: Kevin Feasel

Ben Johnston shares some thoughts:

I started writing this post with the intention of showing performance details and differences between the legacy TSQL functions and the new regex functions, along with basic functionality examples. There is just too much information to put this into a single post, so I’ve split it. This post covers my initial findings and basic guidelines for using regex functions. The next post is an in-depth look at performance. It compares legacy functions and their equivalent regex functions. I’ve already seen posts covering functionality, so that’s why I’m primarily focused on performance. I spend a good portion of my time on performance tuning, so it’s one of the first questions I ask about a new solution, especially one with functionality that could replace some legacy functionality.

This post is high-level advice for each of the functions. The short version is most of the regular expressions won’t make your code faster, so save them for the cases that are extremely difficult or impossible to solve using classic T-SQL techniques. But there are a couple of winners.

Hugo Kornelis has gotten into the video game:

Below, you find my first video blog. I talk about the OVER clause, and I hope to convince you why you should always explicitly specify the ROWS or RANGE clause – even though that takes a bit more typing.

Understanding what the default frames look like for your queries is important. And it’s important to note that the default frame is different based on whether you use SUM(x) OVER() or SUM(x) OVER(ORDER BY X). It also doesn’t matter for ranking window functions (ROW_NUMBER(), RANK(), DENSE_RANK(), NTILE()) because you’re not allowed to specify a window frame.