
Signature
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
Hi Hilary, thanks for replying.
The query I used was as follows (generic field / table placeholder used):
SELECT <field1> FROM <table1> WHERE CONTAINS(<field1>, ' "AZ*" ')
I was away from the office yesterday and interestingly, when I run the exact
same query today, I don't get the error - I also get no results back, which
is in keeping with the fix I believe. Perhaps the error was related to the
index being built in the background as I was attempting the query?
There are definitely results that should be returned; when I run a LIKE
query I get 102998 rows returned:
SELECT <field1> FROM <table1> WHERE <field1> LIKE 'AZ%'
Also, if I refine the FTS search slightly, I get 6612 rows returned which
seems to indicate that the index is populated correctly:
SELECT <field1> FROM <table1> WHERE CONTAINS(<field1>, ' "AZ1*" ')
Many thanks for any assistance you can provide.
Steve
> can you post a sample query which generates this result?
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> > Many thanks,
> > Steve
Daniel Crichton - 29 Jun 2007 09:44 GMT
Equality72521 wrote on Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:16:03 -0700:
> Hi Hilary, thanks for replying.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> related to the index being built in the background as I was attempting the
> query?
This seems to be contrary to the fix, which is supposed to throw the error
message according to http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296456
The fix for SQL2K has been present since SP2.
> There are definitely results that should be returned; when I run a LIKE
> query I get 102998 rows returned:
The above URL suggests that this error will fire when there are more than
around 20,000 results, so getting an error with that many results would be
expected.
Dan
Equality72521 - 29 Jun 2007 15:46 GMT
Thanks for your input Daniel.
I've just noticed that the error doesn't occur on SQL 2005, and there
doesn't appear to be a 20000 row limitation; the same CONTAINS query that
returns zero rows in SQL 2000 returns all rows in SQL 2005.
Thanks again.
Steve
> Equality72521 wrote on Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:16:03 -0700:
>
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> Dan
Simon Sabin - 04 Jul 2007 19:42 GMT
Hello Equality72521,
SQL 2005 has a very different architecture to SQL 2000 so more rows can be
managed
Simon Sabin
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons
> Thanks for your input Daniel.
>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>>
>> Dan
Equality72521 - 05 Jul 2007 09:32 GMT
Thanks for the response Simon. Do you know what the upper limit is within
2005, if indeed there is one?
Regards,
Steve
> Hello Equality72521,
>
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> >>
> >> Dan
Simon Sabin - 05 Jul 2007 18:04 GMT
Hello Equality72521,
I doubt there is a fixed one. More a resource imposed one, i.e. if you hardware
can take it.
Simon Sabin
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons
> Thanks for the response Simon. Do you know what the upper limit is
> within 2005, if indeed there is one?
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Dan
Equality72521 - 06 Jul 2007 13:36 GMT
Great - thanks again Simon.
Steve
> Hello Equality72521,
>
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> >>>>
> >>>> Dan