Storage Engine Info
Still looking for information on NOP commands, I ran across this blog for the SQL Server Storage Engine Team probaby something to keep reviewing.

It seems that a couple of auto manufacturers had done this.  Both Nissan and Lancia had built cars that used a turbo in front of their blower.  The Lancia Delta S4 and the Nissan March ST had similar arrangements.
Here are a couple pictures, one with a rudementary digagram of the idea, and one of what they did on the Lancia.
Some things to consider.
Location of throttle body and MAF.Bypass valve for the turbo to go around the blowertiming and sizing the turbo to complement the blower.
Search on TwinCharging find lots more hits.

AS

What I found was that it took lots of searching till I found this page of various implementations.http://databases.aspfaq.com/database/how-do-i-page-through-a-recordset.html

Turns out the rowcount one works perfect for my need to access a 6.5 compatibility mode database. (no top functionality).
Here is how I implemented that in the stored procedure (Webservice implementation perhaps later):
CREATE    PROCEDURE spimCounts_FetchRowsByGun_xxx (@gunid char(10), @iPageNum int = 1, @iPerPage int = 10)ASbegin set nocount on
DECLARE @ubound INT, @lbound INT, @pages INT, @rows INT  declare @iGunId char(10), @PageNum int, @PerPage int declare @entrytime datetime
-- Reassign passed parameters to  -- help prevent parameter sniffing performance issues. select @iGunID = @gunID select @PageNum = @iPageNum, @PerPage = @iPerPage

-- Find the number of rows to work with and number of pages    SELECT         @rows = COUNT(*),         @pages = COUNT(*) / @perpage     FROM         timItemCounts_csi WITH (NOLOCK) where gunid = @gunid
IF @rows % @perpage != 0 SET @pages = @pages + 1     IF @pagenum  @pages SET @pagenum = @pages      SET @ubound = @perpage * @pagenum      SET @lbound = @ubound - (@perpage - 1)       SELECT         CurrentPage = @pagenum,         TotalPages = @pages,         TotalRows = @rows
SET ROWCOUNT @lbound
SELECT         @entrytime = entrytime    FROM         timItemCounts_csi WITH (NOLOCK)  where gunid = @gunid    ORDER BY  entrytime desc     SET ROWCOUNT @perPage      SELECT  entryid, LocationID as 'LocID', ItemID, UPCID, Qty, EntryTime as 'Entry'    FROM timItemCounts_csi WITH (NOLOCK)     WHERE gunid = @gunid and entrytime end

I have been answering questions on two of the most misunderstood ‘SQL Server Urban Legends’ frequently again so I decided to make a post about them.

Here is the latestFrom this post:http://blogs.msdn.com/psssql/archive/2007/02/21/sql-server-urban-legends-discussed.aspxI have been answering questions on two of the most misunderstood ‘SQL Server Urban Legends’ frequently again so I decided to make a post about them.·         SQL Server Uses One Thread Per Data File·         A Disk Queue Length greater than 2 indicates an I/O bottleneck

Here is the older stuffhttp://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=83430&SiteID=1
al123 Multiple Filegroups Hi experts,I’m new to SQLServer 2000 and would like some advice on filegroups.Is there any advantage to seperate the filegroups for different type of data.For example:
Data_1 for tablesIndex_1 for IndexesAudit_1 for Audit tables
The files for these filegroups would be placed on RAID Disk.
Eric C. (Eric Christensen, SQL Server Storage Engine)No, there is no appreciable gain. Filegroups are mainly for ease of administration across multiple volumes, not performance.
—————–http://www.sql-server-performance.com/filegroups.aspIf your database is very large and very busy, multiple files can be used to increase performance. Here is one example of how you might use multiple files. Let’s say you have a single table with 10 million rows that is heavily queried. If the table is in a single file, such as a single database file, then SQL Server would only use one thread to perform a read of the rows in the table. But if the table were divided into three physical files, then SQL Server would use three threads (one per physical file) to read the table, which potentially could be faster. In addition, if each file were on its own separate physical disk or disk array, the performance gain would even be greater.
Essentially, the more files that a large table is divided into, the greater the potential performance. Of course there is a point where the additional threads aren’t of much use when you max out the server’s I/O. But up until you do max out the I/O, additional threads (and files) should increase performance. [7.0, 2000] Updated 9-19-2005
—————–http://sqljunkies.com/WebLog/odds_and_ends/archive/2006/06/21/21985.aspx
Configuring a server with either 4 or 8 tempdb files may by itself cause performance problems (due to the overhead of SQL having to manage too many files), so the recommendation should be changed to start with just 1, and monitor for tempdb contention. ONLY if you see contention then add more files until the contention is resolved. However it’s worth noting that just adding more files won’t always avoid tempdb performance issues, as it’s entirely possible that the issue is with a slow I/O subsystem. Adding more files ONLY helps resolve contention for the schema lock when creating new objects, which in tempdb can happen at a very high rate.  However not all applications make use of tempdb. It’s possible that specific application may make no use of tempdb. In that case creating multiple tempdb files is a big overhead and a waste of time.
—————-From: Al – view profileDate: Wed, Jan 23 2002 5:01 pmGroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server, microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
BTW, I came across this in SQL 2000 BOL.—————————————————————————-Placing Tables on Filegroups
If the computer has multiple processors, Microsoft® SQL Server 2000 canperform parallel scans of the data. << Multiple parallel scans can beexecuted for a single table if the filegroup of the table contains multiplefiles.>> Whenever a table is accessed sequentially, a separate thread iscreated to read each file in parallel.  << For example, a full scan of atable created on a filegroup comprising of four files will use four separatethreads to read the data in parallel. Therefore, creating more files perfilegroup can help increase performance because a separate thread is used toscan each file in parallel. >>
From: Andrew J. Kelly – view profileDate: Wed, Jan 23 2002 7:37 pmGroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server, microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
This is an error in BOL2000.  I have already reported it and it is confirmedthat it will state otherwise for the next revision.  It is misleading but Ihave confirmed at the source that 2000 does not require multiple files tospawn multiple threads.
– Andrew J. Kelly,  SQL Server MVPTargitInteractive
Please join me at PASS North America in Denver – the first and only userconference dedicated to SQL Server.http://www.sqlpass.org/events/denverjan/index.cfm
“Al” <nos…@nospam.com> wrote in message

FORDFord’s Variable-Assist Power Steering (VAPS) which was first used in 1988 on the Lincoln Continental, and in 1989 on the Ford T-Bird and Mercury Cougar, uses a stepper motor actuator valve to vary steering assist. The valve in the older Lincoln applications is mounted on the steering gear while one on the T-Bird replaces the outlet valve on the power steering pump. The VAPS control module receives two sensor inputs: A vehicle speed signal from a transmission-mounted sensor, and an optical steering wheel rotation sensor in the steering column.
At speeds up to 5 mph, the control module’s output to the actuator valve is zero milliamps (mA) and the actuator valve is wide open allowing full assist as required.
As the vehicle’s speed increases above 5 mph, the module starts to close the actuator valve to reduce power assist in direct proportion to speed. At 20 mph, module output to the actuator valve is 225 mA and the actuator is partly closed to reduce steering assist 20 to 25 percent. At 80 mph, the module’s output reaches its maximum of 550 mA closing the actuator valve to its minimum orifice opening. Assist is now reduced 50 percent from its maximum level.
As the speed drops back below 80 mph, the actuator valve starts to open again to gradually increase power assist in proportion to speed.
The steering wheel rotation sensor also modifies the amount of power assist depending on how quickly the driver is turning the wheels. A sharp sudden turn will cut power to the actuator valve allowing full assist.
On Ford’s later “Electronic Variable Orifice” or EVO system (1991 models & up), a small stepper motor is also used to open a variable orifice valve on the steering rack.

http://www.aa1car.com/library/2004/bf10434.htm