Re: Temp tables vs. Table variables
From: Adam Machanic (amachanic_at_hotmail._removetoemail_.com)
Date: 09/28/04
- Next message: Damon: "Re: Remove duplicate rows?"
- Previous message: Lucas Tam: "Re: SQL vs MYSQL"
- In reply to: Aaron [SQL Server MVP]: "Re: Temp tables vs. Table variables"
- Next in thread: Roji. P. Thomas: "Re: Temp tables vs. Table variables"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:17 -0400
"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:%23rJCpaWpEHA.348@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > considering thetable variable does not
> > have to write to tempdb and is kept in RAM?
>
> Who said that was the case?
I've read that misconception in lots of articles, unfortunately, e.g.:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20010823.asp
"... using the new SQL Server TABLE type. This is more or less a "clone"
of an actual table, except that it is a variable and it normally operates
100% IN MEMORY ..."
It's unfortunate that a lot of websites don't have articles tech
reviewed (never mind copyedited) before publishing them and creating
confusion.
- Next message: Damon: "Re: Remove duplicate rows?"
- Previous message: Lucas Tam: "Re: SQL vs MYSQL"
- In reply to: Aaron [SQL Server MVP]: "Re: Temp tables vs. Table variables"
- Next in thread: Roji. P. Thomas: "Re: Temp tables vs. Table variables"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|