Sorting
in [Programming SQL]
|
From: simon on 15 Apr 2010 08:02 I used to use CASE statement in JOIN, WHERE or ORDER BY statements. Then I found out that almost always execution times where much faster(even 5 times) if I rewriten sql statement without case statements and execute it as dynamic sql. The more case statements I had, the faster execution time was with dynamic sql compered to case statements. Since than I use always dynamic sql instead of case statements. It was newer slower than sql with case. I don't have test script at the moment. You think that there are some cases where CASE is faster? thank you for your help, Simon
From: Uri Dimant on 15 Apr 2010 08:08
simon I have benchmarked this situation as I try to use dynamic sql as a last resort. It also depends on what indexes do you have a take a look into a execution plan to compare performance "simon" <zupan.net(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f1bd56b2-09f1-41db-8593-71579d6b5711(a)x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com... >I used to use CASE statement in JOIN, WHERE or ORDER BY statements. > Then I found out that > almost always execution times where much faster(even 5 times) if I > rewriten sql statement without case statements and execute it as > dynamic sql. > The more case statements I had, the faster execution time was with > dynamic sql compered to case statements. > Since than I use always dynamic sql instead of case statements. It was > newer slower than sql with case. > > I don't have test script at the moment. You think that there are some > cases where CASE is faster? > > thank you for your help, > Simon |