Comments on: Temp tables and table variables http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/ A discussion on SQL Server Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:50:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Pradnesh http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/comment-page-1/#comment-34 Pradnesh Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:45:30 +0000 http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/#comment-34 Great article Great article

]]> By: Gail http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/comment-page-1/#comment-33 Gail Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:48:55 +0000 http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/#comment-33 Interesting. I hadn't noticed that. It could be that, because the optimiser thinks there's only one row, it doesn't see a need for parallelism. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll see if I can confirm if that is still the case on SQL 2005. Interesting. I hadn’t noticed that. It could be that, because the optimiser thinks there’s only one row, it doesn’t see a need for parallelism.

Thanks for pointing that out. I’ll see if I can confirm if that is still the case on SQL 2005.

]]> By: Rich http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Rich Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:59:57 +0000 http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2007/12/19/temp-tables-and-table-variables/#comment-32 Just for interests sake, an extension of point 2 above - they appear to remove the choice of parallelism, effectively making the query maxdop 1. Least, in 2k anyway. Just for interests sake, an extension of point 2 above – they appear to remove the choice of parallelism, effectively making the query maxdop 1. Least, in 2k anyway.

]]>