Just for laughs, we’re going to take a look at a slightly-too-complex yet elegant solution to a seemingly simple task: creating a list of 100 fictional company names for a demo database.
Fibonacci’s numbers are a sequence of numbers calculated using a recursion pattern that typically lends itself more to procedural programming. This makes it trickier to implement in a well-performing solution in T-SQL, as T-SQL is set-based.
A number of OLTP systems store dimension data in SCD2-like tables in order to retain all the revisions whenever the dimension information changes. In certain situations, you may come across a need to join two or more SCD tables, while keeping all the versions information intact. Sound tricky? Not really.
This week’s post is a requirement that I see very regularly as a developer. You get a plaintext string containing one or more ranges. Each range is comma delimited, and the start and end values of the range are separated by a dash. The string could look something like this, for example: 100-120,121-499,510,520,790-999.
Wouldn’t it be practical if we could construct a table value function that returns one row for each range, with columns for the start and end of each range?
A common scenario you may have encountered is the need to calculate the first business day after a given date. There are quite a few ugly ways to solve this, including cursors, but there are also some pretty neat ways to approach the problem, and as a bonus, you’ll learn about recursion and the new LEAD(), LAG() functions and accumulation in T-SQL.
Working with dependencies, particularly recursive dependencies, may not always be entirely intuitive, but it could be critical knowledge in your database development work. This article focuses primarily on different ways of visualizing dependencies and how to loop through them using recursive common table expressions.
Here’s an interesting feature I found in the code of a colleague the other day. A common task in T-SQL is eliminating duplicate records. This became a lot easier with the introduction of windowed functions way back in SQL Server 2005, such as ROW_NUMBER(), but it turns out, I’ve still been missing out on a really simple and cool solution.
Here’s a strange insight that I gained when building a test case where I needed some randomized values. In order to generate random values, you can use the NEWID() function, which creates a uniqueidentifier value for each row. But NEWID() comes with a strange behaviour, that some (including me) will consider a bug, while others (including the SQL Server development team) consider it to be “by design”.
Check out this interesting article from SQL Server superstar