Thanks a lot for detail explanation.

I have sql query with where clause.

Where IsActive = 1

IsActive is bit field in table.

It showing me Predicate with Convert_Implicit in query execution plan for above column.

Now I convert where clause like

Where IsActive = CAST(1 AS BIT)

Even it showing me Predicate like IsActive=(1)

Plan also showing Clustered Index Seek in above both cases

Is there any performance problem in above both cases, please elaborate more on this.

This might be a very simple question but however just wanted to ask as I’m kind off stuck at a point. I’m trying to create a filtered index on a column, but I’m not able to because I’m getting a syntax error. I checked if this is permission issue, but that’s not the case, because I’m able to create and alter indexes and also use other option in the create index syntax.

CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX “IX_test_NC” ON
dbo.Table_name (column_name)
WHERE substring(column_name,1,3) = ‘value’

The error is :

Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 4
Incorrect syntax near the keyword ‘WHERE’.

Can anyone give me the method of alter way of left outer join Because when we create a indexed view we could not able create index on theat view due to statement contains FULL JOIN or LEFT JOIN or RIGHT JOIN. So i searched the web fully it gives suggestion using UNION Instead of left join,I mentioned query below. So could you give me any other method is available to replace LEFT JOIN with that other than UNION? Is it full to reduce optimization cost when we use UNION instead of LEFT JOIN? Quick suggestions are highly appreciated………….buddys………

———————-My original table using left join method—————–

SELECT tablea.*,
CASE
WHEN tableb.tablebcolumn1 IS NULL THEN 0
ELSE 1
END IsHosted
FROM tablea
LEFT JOIN tableb ON tablea.column=tableb.column

———–Example of alter way of using UNIONALL instead of leftouterjoin ———

SELECT tablea.,
CASE
WHEN tableb.tablebcolumn1 IS NULL THEN 0
ELSE 1
END IsHosted
FROM tablea where tablea.column IN (select tableb.column from tableb) UNION ALL SELECT tablea.,
CASE
WHEN tableb.tablebcolumn1 IS NULL THEN 0
ELSE 1
END IsHosted
FROM tablea where tablea.column NOT IN (select tableb.column from tableb)

————————————————————————————– Note: Due to security reason i did not give original table name. i gave table name of tablea and tableb………as my originaltable name

I cant get the answer for the following question from my senior colleagues so i am escalting to you.I dont know if it belong to this post or not.but after reading this i came across this problem

Question is something like my isolation level is set to read committed.Which is default for SQL SERVER.Now i am doing a explicit transaction(Where When i will execute commit after that only my data will get committed).In this situation.

I have a table of 100 rows.I am executing one update on table which will affect 10 rows.This update wont get committ.

First doubt : Is it after each single row will be updated and then that row related index will be updated?
or After updating 10 rows Index will be updated for all 10 rows.??

Second doubt : After committ only my belonging index will be updated or before committ and how??

Please if you want i can try to explain further my problem.

Thanks
Kamesh

See: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190309.aspx for precedence order.

Thanks.

This is a great article and very informative.