Home/ Questions/Q 341197
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-12T10:41:13+00:00

I was reading over the documentation for query hints: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181714(SQL.90).aspx And noticed this: FAST

  • 0

I was reading over the documentation for query hints:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181714(SQL.90).aspx

And noticed this:
FAST number_rows
Specifies that the query is optimized for fast retrieval of the first number_rows. This is a nonnegative integer. After the first number_rows are returned, the query continues execution and produces its full result set.

So when I’m doing a query like:

Select Name from Students where ID = 444

Should I bother with a hint like this? Assuming SQL Server 2005, when should I?

— edit —

Also should one bother when limiting results:

Select top 10 * from Students OPTION (FAST 10)
Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    When using TOP x, there’s no benefit of also using OPTION FAST x. The query optimizer already makes its decisions based on how many rows you are retrieving. Same goes for trivial queries, such as querying for a particular value from a unique index.

    Other than that, OPTION FAST x could help when you know the number of results is likely below x, but the query optimizer does not. Of course, if the query optimizer is choosing poor paths for complex queries with few results, your statistics may need to be updated. And if you guess wrong on x, the query may end up taking longer–almost always a risk when giving hints.

    The above statement has not been tested–it may be that all queries take just as long to fully execute, if not longer. Getting the first 10 rows fast is great if there are only 8 rows, but theoretically the query still has to execute fully before finishing. The benefit I’m thinking may be there because the query execution takes a different path expecting fewer total records, when in fact it’s really trying to get the first x faster. Those two types of optimizations may not be in alignment.

    • 0