<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Root of all Evil</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/03/11/the-root-of-all-evil/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/03/11/the-root-of-all-evil/</link>
	<description>A discussion on SQL Server</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 23:51:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gail</title>
		<link>http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/03/11/the-root-of-all-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-1685</link>
		<dc:creator>Gail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 19:33:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlinthewild.co.za/?p=563#comment-1685</guid>
		<description>You missed the point...

I never said don&#039;t tune. I said that if the query performs acceptably under production load and production volumes then don&#039;t waste time tuning that, focus on other code which is not performing acceptably under production volumes and production load. Don&#039;t obsess over a couple ms, focus time and resources on real problems.

30 missing indexes means performance was never good enough. 2 missing indexes that turn a 20ms query into a 15 ms query is what I was talking about. That was a waste of time. Time that could far better have been spend turning a 15 second query into a 50 ms query.

&quot;Good performance&quot; is by definition good enough. If it&#039;s not good enough then it&#039;s &quot;Unacceptable performance&quot; not &quot;Good performance&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed the point&#8230;</p>
<p>I never said don&#8217;t tune. I said that if the query performs acceptably under production load and production volumes then don&#8217;t waste time tuning that, focus on other code which is not performing acceptably under production volumes and production load. Don&#8217;t obsess over a couple ms, focus time and resources on real problems.</p>
<p>30 missing indexes means performance was never good enough. 2 missing indexes that turn a 20ms query into a 15 ms query is what I was talking about. That was a waste of time. Time that could far better have been spend turning a 15 second query into a 50 ms query.</p>
<p>&#8220;Good performance&#8221; is by definition good enough. If it&#8217;s not good enough then it&#8217;s &#8220;Unacceptable performance&#8221; not &#8220;Good performance&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous DBA</title>
		<link>http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/03/11/the-root-of-all-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-1684</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous DBA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:40:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlinthewild.co.za/?p=563#comment-1684</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sorry, I totally disagree with your comments about acceptable performance. As a practicing and long time database architect, when I do NOT tune the production code, it inevitably comes back to bite me in the ass. I just got done tuning some &#039;production&#039; code that was missing about 30 critical indexes. Had this code been tuned properly to begin with, I would NOT HAVE HAD THIS ISSUE. &#039;Good performance&#039; isn&#039;t good enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sorry, I totally disagree with your comments about acceptable performance. As a practicing and long time database architect, when I do NOT tune the production code, it inevitably comes back to bite me in the ass. I just got done tuning some &#8216;production&#8217; code that was missing about 30 critical indexes. Had this code been tuned properly to begin with, I would NOT HAVE HAD THIS ISSUE. &#8216;Good performance&#8217; isn&#8217;t good enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RowlandG</title>
		<link>http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/03/11/the-root-of-all-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-636</link>
		<dc:creator>RowlandG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlinthewild.co.za/?p=563#comment-636</guid>
		<description>Really enjoyed your common sense approach to optimization. Given that most shops lack resources one would think this would be the more typical approach. Unfortunately it&#039;s not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really enjoyed your common sense approach to optimization. Given that most shops lack resources one would think this would be the more typical approach. Unfortunately it&#8217;s not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

