Category: T-SQL

Matthew McGiffen shares one technique to generate reference numbers using a sequence and the FORMAT function:

One thing to note is that, while the sequence will generally produce unique number, it is still worth enforcing that in your table definition with a unique constraint i.e.

ALTER TABLE dbo.Orders ADD CONSTRAINT UQ_Orders_OrderReference UNIQUE(OrderReference);

This prevents someone from issuing an UPDATE command that might create a duplicate reference. 

As long as you can live with the occasional gap in your reference number, sequences are a good solution to the problem.

Erik Darling points out that running sp_executesql with the WITH RECOMPILE setting doesn’t really change anything:

This’ll give us the key lookup plan you see above. If I re-run the query and use the 2010-12-30 date, we’ll re-use the key lookup plan.

That’s an example of how parameters are sniffed.

Sometimes, that’s not a good thing. Like, if I passed in 2008-12-30, we probably wouldn’t like a lookup too much.

One common “solution” to parameter sniffing is to tack a recompile hint somewhere.

Click through for Erik’s demonstration.

I have a post up on using calendar tables:

There’s one problem with picking a SQL Saturday in April: Easter and Passover tend to run right around that time, and nobody wants a SQL Saturday on Passover or the day before Easter. Unfortunately, our calendar table doesn’t include holiday information. So let’s add it!

Working with holidays and working with fiscal years versus calendar years are just two of the uses of calendar tables. But they’re the only two that I show.

Ned Otter is not a fan of ORMs:

I’ve seen a lot of tech come and go in my time, but nothing I’ve seen vexes me more than “framework generated SQL”.  No doubt I’m ignorant about some aspects of it, but its usage continues to confound many a DBA.

To troubleshoot one of these bad boys, you might consider Google Glass, but it will fail you. The first issue is that these crappy frameworks generate a code tsunami that’s almost (or actually) unreadable by humans. The tables you know and love are aliased with names such as “Extent1” and the like. Multiple nestings of that, and it’s all gobbledygook aka spaghetti code.

These work great as long as you have more hardware to throw at the problem.

I would differentiate here a micro-ORM like Dapper from a Hibernate or Entity Framework like Ned has in mind, where the difference is that Dapper acts as a way of automating the data access layer but you still write the SQL queries or stored procedures.

I have a post up on building a calendar table:

Another thing to keep in mind here is that you’re only going to load your calendar table once, so if it takes two minutes to do, who really cares? The version I have should run reasonably fast–I calculated 726 years on slow hardware in 19 seconds and fast hardware in 11 seconds. I’m sure you can play code golf and get it done faster, but that’s probably not a good use of your time.

What you want to sweat instead is query time: how long is it taking to access this data?

Click through for a script.

Arthur Daniels looks at what you can see in an execution plan with dynamic data masking:

I think Dynamic Data Masking is pretty cool. The idea is basically to provide a mask for certain users when they might see protected data. The documentation on this feature is actually pretty deep, it’s worth a look.

I just want to show you how you can see the masking in an execution plan. Let’s mask some data in StackOverflow2010! (Also, there’s an interesting side note at the end)

Click through for those notes.