I have seen the below code in so many examples, you are using for insert # records

DECLARE @idx INT = 0
WHILE @idx < 50000
BEGIN
INSERT INTO Sparsed VALUES (NULL,NULL, NULL)
SET @idx+=1
END
GO

instead of the above code we can use below code also – ct?

INSERT INTO Sparsed VALUES (NULL,NULL, NULL)
Go 50000

if it's correct, may I know is there any difference between the above two quries..?

Thanks,
Venkat_t919

wait your response

Thanks!

Sparse column with zero value is taking space similar to non-null value.Do we have an advantage of using zeroes for sparse columns?

Thanks & Regards,
Sreelekha

IF (SELECT OBJECT_ID(‘tempdb..#tmpVintage’)) IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #tmpVintage

CREATE TABLE #tmpVintage(VntSeq INTEGER NULL,
VntVintage VARCHAR(4) NOT NULL,
VntTranDate DATETIME NOT NULL,
VntIssueRcpt CHAR(1) NOT NULL,
VntLotKey INTEGER NOT NULL,
VntPodKey INTEGER NOT NULL,
VntPodCount TINYINT NOT NULL,
VntTagKey INTEGER NOT NULL,
VntTranQty DECIMAL(18,5) NOT NULL,
VntTranUOM VARCHAR(2) NOT NULL,
VntTranRunQty DECIMAL(18,5) NULL,
VntQty DECIMAL(18,5) NULL,
VntRun DECIMAL(18,5) NULL,
VntPct DECIMAL(18,5) NULL,
VntSparseCols XML COLUMN_SET FOR ALL_SPARSE_COLUMNS)

– ADD THE COLUMNS FOR EACH INPUT LOT – TO BE USED FOR KEEPING RUNNING TOTALS BY INPUT LOT
SELECT @SQL =
STUFF((SELECT DISTINCT
‘ALTER TABLE #tmpVintage ADD [VntRun' + CAST(triInputLotKey AS VARCHAR) + '] DECIMAL(18,5) SPARSE NULL, [VntPct' + CAST(triInputLotKey AS VARCHAR) + '] DECIMAL(18,5) SPARSE NULL ‘
FROM #TraceInputs
WHERE triInputLotKey 0
ORDER BY ‘ALTER TABLE #tmpVintage ADD [VntRun' + CAST(triInputLotKey AS VARCHAR) + '] DECIMAL(18,5) SPARSE NULL, [VntPct' + CAST(triInputLotKey AS VARCHAR) + '] DECIMAL(18,5) SPARSE NULL ‘
FOR XML PATH(”)
), 1, 0, ”)
EXECUTE (@SQL)

Thanks & Regards
Piyush Sachan

CREATE TABLE UnSparsed(ID INT IDENTITY(1,1),
FirstCol INT,
SecondCol VARCHAR(100),
ThirdCol SmallDateTime…!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
GO
CREATE TABLE Sparsed(ID INT IDENTITY(1,1),
FirstCol INT ,
SecondCol VARCHAR(100) ,
ThirdCol SmallDateTime SPARSE….!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1)
GO
set nocount on
DECLARE @idx INT = 0
WHILE @idx < 5000
BEGIN
INSERT INTO UnSparsed VALUES (4,'ff', null)
INSERT INTO Sparsed VALUES (4, 'ff', null)
SET @idx+=1
END
set nocount off
GO
sp_spaceused 'UnSparsed'
GO
sp_spaceused 'Sparsed'

set nocount on
DECLARE @idx INT = 0
WHILE @idx < 1000
BEGIN
INSERT INTO UnSparsed VALUES (4,null, null)
INSERT INTO Sparsed VALUES (4, null, null)
SET @idx+=1
END
set nocount off
GO
sp_spaceused 'UnSparsed'
GO
sp_spaceused 'Sparsed'

This could be written better: “it will be take lesser space then regular column”

It probably should say, “it will take less space than a regular column”.

Thanks!
Clay

I am not quite sure if sparse columns are that great. I mean SQL2008 does come with an option to compress row data.

How would this feature work combined with sparse Cols?

And I dont think the cost of diskspace is that high these days. You could save a few bytes here and there, but what would you really gain? You can have more columns per row, but I see 1024 and think do we realy need more in a realtional DB? I can see more in a cube, but then most columns would store redundant data,and row compression should be very efficient.

You mention a performance hit? How big is it? That would be much more interesting.