<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>SQL Server Performance &#187; Michael Balloni</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sql-server-performance.com/author/michaelballoni/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com</link>
	<description>SQL Server Performance Tuning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 06:37:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>SQL Server Join Nastiness Tamed: Finding Joy In The INNER LOOP</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2003/join-inner-loop/</link>
		<comments>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2003/join-inner-loop/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Balloni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Performance Tuning]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?=217</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Microsoft SQL Server sometimes uses hash and merge joins when querying large tables when uncomplicated nested loop joins would result in better performance and less server impact. In many such cases, query times go from many milliseconds to many seconds because hash table joins require that large amounts of data be processed and temporarily stored, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2003/join-inner-loop/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>StrCat.Catter &#8211; An Efficient String Concatenation Component</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/string-concat-vb/</link>
		<comments>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/string-concat-vb/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Apr 2000 01:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Balloni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Performance Tuning]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?=164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wrote the COM component &#8211; StrCat.Catter &#8211; because string concatenation in VBscript has poor performance characteristics. I found that code like this:&#60;%Dim rsSet rs = ExecuteSql(&#8220;SELECT Username FROM Users ORDER BY Username&#8221;)Dim some_strsome_str = &#8220;&#8221;do until rs.EOFsome_str = some_str &#38; rs(0) &#38; &#8220;&#60;br&#62;&#8221; &#38; vbCrLfrs.MoveNextloopResponse.Write some_str%&#62;performed very poorly. The code took a long time [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/string-concat-vb/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SQL Server Lock Contention Tamed: The Joys Of NOLOCK and ROWLOCK</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/lock-contention-nolock-rowlock/</link>
		<comments>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/lock-contention-nolock-rowlock/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Apr 2000 01:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Balloni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Performance Tuning]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?=163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Relational databases, like Microsoft&#8217;s SQL Server, use locks to prevent multiple users from making conflicting modifications to a set of data. When a set of data is locked by a user, no other users can modify that same set of data until the first user finishes modifying the data and relinquishes the lock. There are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2000/lock-contention-nolock-rowlock/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
