<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://sqlblog.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Linchi Shea : tempdb</title><link>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/tempdb/default.aspx</link><description>Tags: tempdb</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP2 (Build: 61129.1)</generator><item><title>Temp table name resolution</title><link>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2010/07/15/temp-table-name-resolution-or-maybe-not.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:33:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">21093a07-8b3d-42db-8cbf-3350fcbf5496:27091</guid><dc:creator>Linchi Shea</dc:creator><slash:comments>3</slash:comments><comments>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/comments/27091.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/commentrss.aspx?PostID=27091</wfw:commentRss><description>I was reading Michael Coles' post on Dynamic SQL and Late Binding , and it reminded me of an issue I struggled with a while back. The issue started out as a local temp table name resolution issue. But it was also a compilation time vs. run time issue,...(&lt;a href="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2010/07/15/temp-table-name-resolution-or-maybe-not.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://sqlblog.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=27091" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/name+resolution/default.aspx">name resolution</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Temp+table/default.aspx">Temp table</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/tempdb/default.aspx">tempdb</category></item><item><title>SQL Server challenge: show me trace flag 1118 is significant -- a quick update</title><link>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/10/02/sql-server-challenge-show-me-trace-flag-1118-is-significant-a-quick-update.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:42:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">21093a07-8b3d-42db-8cbf-3350fcbf5496:17193</guid><dc:creator>Linchi Shea</dc:creator><slash:comments>3</slash:comments><comments>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/comments/17193.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/commentrss.aspx?PostID=17193</wfw:commentRss><description>I posted the following SQL Server challenge yesterday: Describe a reproducible workload that would see significant throughput improvement when trace flag 1118 is enabled. In response, Konstantin Korobkov wanted to know whether the number of data files...(&lt;a href="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/10/02/sql-server-challenge-show-me-trace-flag-1118-is-significant-a-quick-update.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://sqlblog.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=17193" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/attachment/17193.ashx" length="13355" type="image/gif" /><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Benchmark/default.aspx">Benchmark</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Best+Practices/default.aspx">Best Practices</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Performance/default.aspx">Performance</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/tempdb/default.aspx">tempdb</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Trace+flags/default.aspx">Trace flags</category></item><item><title>SQL Server challenge: show me trace flag 1118 is significant</title><link>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/10/01/sql-server-challenge-show-me-trace-flag-1118-is-significant.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:53:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">21093a07-8b3d-42db-8cbf-3350fcbf5496:17179</guid><dc:creator>Linchi Shea</dc:creator><slash:comments>10</slash:comments><comments>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/comments/17179.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/commentrss.aspx?PostID=17179</wfw:commentRss><description>Here is a SQL Server challenge as I have failed so far: Describe a reproducible workload that would see significant throughput improvement when trace flag 1118 is enabled. I have seen a lot of chatters, anecdotes, and stories on the impact of trace flag...(&lt;a href="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/10/01/sql-server-challenge-show-me-trace-flag-1118-is-significant.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://sqlblog.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=17179" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><enclosure url="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/attachment/17179.ashx" length="27708" type="image/gif" /><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Benchmark/default.aspx">Benchmark</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Best+Practices/default.aspx">Best Practices</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/SQL+Server+2008/default.aspx">SQL Server 2008</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/tempdb/default.aspx">tempdb</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Trace+flags/default.aspx">Trace flags</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Waits/default.aspx">Waits</category></item><item><title>Performance impact: tempdb and update statistics</title><link>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/08/16/performance-impact-tempdb-and-update-stats.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 01:10:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">21093a07-8b3d-42db-8cbf-3350fcbf5496:16055</guid><dc:creator>Linchi Shea</dc:creator><slash:comments>9</slash:comments><comments>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/comments/16055.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/commentrss.aspx?PostID=16055</wfw:commentRss><description>In SQL Server, one of the most significant architectural legacies from Sybase is the use of a single globally shared tempdb database. Any time you have something globally shared in a highly concurrent system, the shared resource can become a huge impediment...(&lt;a href="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2009/08/16/performance-impact-tempdb-and-update-stats.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://sqlblog.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=16055" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/Performance/default.aspx">Performance</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/tempdb/default.aspx">tempdb</category><category domain="http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/tags/UPDATE+STATISTICS/default.aspx">UPDATE STATISTICS</category></item></channel></rss>