MS -SQL behaviour of INSERTED / DELETED tables --> very strange

Hi All,
We have an odd thing while using the DELETED and INSERTED-
"tables"in triggers.
If my collegue executes and SP in the Query Analizer, a
query in a trigger takes a lot less when I execute the
same SP.
We think the difference is in the the usages of the
DELETED and INSERTED-tables. When my colleque runs it, the
DELETED and INSERTED-tables are being used, but when I run
the SP, a full tables scan is being performed (we
think!!!).
Has anyone seen this behaviour before or does anyone have
a solution for this?
Time difference between my collegue and I is 0.5 sec per
trigger (2 triggers in the SP are executed and lots of SP
executions).
Thanks in Advance,
Jeroen
PS. MS-SQL 2000 with SP3 on WIN 2000 serverJeroen
Can you show us your SP's code?
Have you ran SQL Server Profiler to identify what is going on when you
execute the SP?
"Jeroen Kraij" <jkrai@.kempen.nl> wrote in message
news:080e01c3bfc7$e7334580$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> We have an odd thing while using the DELETED and INSERTED-
> "tables"in triggers.
> If my collegue executes and SP in the Query Analizer, a
> query in a trigger takes a lot less when I execute the
> same SP.
> We think the difference is in the the usages of the
> DELETED and INSERTED-tables. When my colleque runs it, the
> DELETED and INSERTED-tables are being used, but when I run
> the SP, a full tables scan is being performed (we
> think!!!).
> Has anyone seen this behaviour before or does anyone have
> a solution for this?
> Time difference between my collegue and I is 0.5 sec per
> trigger (2 triggers in the SP are executed and lots of SP
> executions).
> Thanks in Advance,
> Jeroen
> PS. MS-SQL 2000 with SP3 on WIN 2000 server|||Hi,
The "thing" I would like to focus on is that we have a Pc
with an SQL-client.
My coleque logs in to this PC and connects to SQL-server
and executes the SP.
When I do exactly the same on this PC, The execution of
the SP takes a lot more time.
In the executionplan we can see that the processingtime of
the trigger(s) are the difference...
Is there any logical explanation for this? Or a solution?
Jeroen
>--Original Message--
>Jeroen
>Can you show us your SP's code?
>Have you ran SQL Server Profiler to identify what is
going on when you
>execute the SP?
>
>
>
>"Jeroen Kraij" <jkrai@.kempen.nl> wrote in message
>news:080e01c3bfc7$e7334580$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Hi All,
>> We have an odd thing while using the DELETED and
INSERTED-
>> "tables"in triggers.
>> If my collegue executes and SP in the Query Analizer, a
>> query in a trigger takes a lot less when I execute the
>> same SP.
>> We think the difference is in the the usages of the
>> DELETED and INSERTED-tables. When my colleque runs it,
the
>> DELETED and INSERTED-tables are being used, but when I
run
>> the SP, a full tables scan is being performed (we
>> think!!!).
>> Has anyone seen this behaviour before or does anyone
have
>> a solution for this?
>> Time difference between my collegue and I is 0.5 sec per
>> trigger (2 triggers in the SP are executed and lots of
SP
>> executions).
>> Thanks in Advance,
>> Jeroen
>> PS. MS-SQL 2000 with SP3 on WIN 2000 server
>
>.
>