Huh... that's shame. You were right. With those queries, it showed discrepancy. It marked such a good performance.... shame.....
Anyway, I'll leave this out for now.
Printable View
Huh... that's shame. You were right. With those queries, it showed discrepancy. It marked such a good performance.... shame.....
Anyway, I'll leave this out for now.
Yes, it did show a considerable performance improvement when I looked at the estimated execution plan for the queries. It was a performance cost of about 66% Table1, 34% Table2
However, I put indexes on the data_value field in both tables, and the execution plan changed to be 50% for each. Proper indexing greatly improved the performance of Table1, but not so much for Table2.