UDF's in SQL2005

8 Jun 2006 11:30 PM

Andrew

Hi all,

We have been performing some testing on an application that has been
upgraded from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 and have had dramatic improvements. A job
that was previously taking 13 hours is now completing in 90 minutes. This
application heavilly uses UDF's as part of a scrub and match data cleansing
routine.

While there could be many different reasons for the improvement both
environmental and software related anecdotally at least it seems that SQL
2005 handles UDF's far more efficiently than SQL 2000.

Does anyone know whether there has been any fundamental differences to the
way in which User defined functions have been handled in SQL 2005 as opposed
to SQL 2000?

Regards,
Andrew

9 Jun 2006 3:08 AM

navyzhu@gmail.com

Hi, Andrew,
Speed improvement is a great thing, every one will like it. Just as
your mention, I suspect that improvement may be cause by query
statement. I just test some query statements between 2K and 2K5, I use
some index to turn performance at both 2K and 2K5. And I find 2K have
different performance before and after buliding index, but 2K5 always
have good performance before and after building index. So I think may
be your performance improvement will cause by it.

Andrew (donotspam) å†™é“ï¼š

Show quoteHide quote

> Hi all,
>
> We have been performing some testing on an application that has been
> upgraded from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 and have had dramatic improvements. A job
> that was previously taking 13 hours is now completing in 90 minutes. This
> application heavilly uses UDF's as part of a scrub and match data cleansing
> routine.
>
> While there could be many different reasons for the improvement both
> environmental and software related anecdotally at least it seems that SQL
> 2005 handles UDF's far more efficiently than SQL 2000.
>
> Does anyone know whether there has been any fundamental differences to the
> way in which User defined functions have been handled in SQL 2005 as opposed
> to SQL 2000?
>
> Regards,
> Andrew