I am looking to refactor the query below to be more readable and modified. The first half is similar to the other, with the exception of the database (table name is same.)
select column 1 as c1, ... column from nscn Select 'Some String' as Database1.dbo.Table1UnionC1 ... Select Database1.dbo.Table2Union from CNN as NULL Column 1 ASC1, ... Columns from NSNC Database2.dbo.Table1Union's selection is defined as 'some string' C1, ... as nULL from cn database2.dbo.Table2
is the definition of this query and And I'm calling to write again, but I do not know how!
Edit : We can not use linq and we need different results; I am looking to make the query smaller in the physical file size, but not returned in the results.
Edit : The database that I am asking is a proprietary ERP database. Restructuring is not an option.
This is a pretty standard SQL pattern, sometimes it's easy to dry for OAP / SP Process principles are easy to transfer, but it is not necessary that there are transferable concepts
Note that how easily you can prevent the full logical design of the query, through the subdomain vs hunting If there was an extra column of a sub-projection, or if the column was inverted, then it would be left. It is basically a very simple SQL statement for grok in the form of a performance unit, where it becomes inconsistent, it will entangle it.
And when you do debugging, then you may be able to use the option to highlight the editor's text selectively in some parts of the statement - a technique that is not present in the procedural code. OTOH, if they are scattered in thoughts, then all the pieces can be messy in an attempt to trace. Even CTE can also make this inconvenient.
Comments
Post a Comment