I wasn't referring to CodeProject.TV, but only CP itself. I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.

Cheers. Hadn't noticed. Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.

Brady Kelly wrote: It's because they're Arabs Iranian people are not Arab

Hi using api hooking you can monitor the network usage such: wsock32.dll has two funcaiton in the socket level 1 send 2 receive from that you can monitor and it works fine.and it calculates the entire upload download.

Any Italian or Mandarin word with a z in it. For the reverse (a hidden z after a t), the Dutch pronounce the suffix "tie" as "tzee". I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

I looked at it. The fragmentation is 0%

Maysam Mahfouzi wrote: I didn't know that a method with override modifier can have no body. Actually I didn't either and was a bit surprised too. I'm not very familiar with java, it's one of my read-only languages, but in contrast to c# it probably has a more relaxed syntax. c# tends to make very few assumptions and as a consequence requires that intentions are stated explicitly. Alan.

I found something recently that discussed arith_abort (I think, the link is at work) which is set on by default, setting it to off apparently made a difference to some procs that showed this behavior. I have seen this behavior and after doing all the optimising possible the proc was still slow, that's when I started chasing down the more esoteric suggestions. If I find the link I will post it Monday.... Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

Nothing, there are no jobs. Software Kinetics - Moving software

Dear Mika You have not been on codeproject for a long time. Hope you are fine. I have asked a question here[^]. Could you please take a look at it?

Maysam Mahfouzi wrote: The problems is, I don't like to manipulate the initial urls If you don't want to manipulate the URL, doesn't that actually mean you store each URL just as it is (just check that the exact URL isn't found)? Maysam Mahfouzi wrote: The first thing that came to my mind as a solution, was to make urls canonical before inserting them into database One thing is that you could make a canonical version first, store it in parent-table and then store the unmodified url in child-table. Something like CanonicalUrl ( CanonicalUrlId int, Url varchar(500) ) Url ( UrlIdId int, CanonicalUrl int, Url varchar(500) ) If you want you could also build a calculated column to Url table to represent the canonical form. However all these add extra logic to the data handling. So I'm wondering why do you want to prevent storing similar url's at all. Of course storing exactly the same may not be wise, but that's easily prevented. The need to optimize rises from a bad design.My articles[^]

You need to close the reader before you can get the output parameters. No idea why, it has always been this way. Bob Ashfield Consultants Ltd

Since cross join doesn't have any 'OUTER' option, the result is always all combinations from all sources. If any of the sources have 0 rows the size of the result set is 0. I think you could use simple outer joins and unions to get desired rows. Something like: SELECT * FROM Table A LEFT OUTER JOIN Table B ON 1=1 WHERE ... UNION SELECT * FROM Table A RIGHT OUTER JOIN Table B ON 1=1 WHERE ... However, I would re-check the design of the data model since normally the need to cross join is very rare and may indicate a design problem. The need to optimize rises from a bad design. My articles[^]

Might be :-D The need to optimize rises from a bad design. My articles[^]

Thank you again, I tested it and it worked for me too :) :rose:

Thank you very much I didn't know I can search on google _

Thank you. So there should be no problem. I don't know why somebody told me it's not possible to use it on fields larger than 900 bytes! Maybe I misunderstood the point. _ modified on Sunday, October 5, 2008 4:47 PM

Just noticed your message. That article is a good one. Especially concentrate on the total cost (= estimated seconds) and how it's distributed. Then observe logical I/O amounts (don't mind so much about physical I/O). Your question is not bothering me at all. Actually this area is one of my special interests :) Happy coding! ;) Mika The need to optimize rises from a bad design

I think I've found the problem. One of the data access functions was acquiring a DataReader without closing it. I don't know why I hadn't see it so far :doh: Thanks for your help though :rose: _