Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
(I will still be using the spooky hash on this binary result. The workload uses hash joins and the hashed value is used for one of the hash builds. I don't want a long binary value in the hash build because it requires too much memory.)
(I will still be using the spooky hash on this binary result. The workload uses hash joins and the hashed value is used for one of the hash builds. I don't want a long binary value in the hash build because it requires too much memory.)
Notice removed Reward existing answer by Joe Obbish
It does not handle NULLs correctly. If COL1 is NULL for row 1 and COL2 is NULL for row 2 then both rows will be converted to a NULL string. I believe that correct handling of NULLs is the hardest part of converting the entire row correctly. All allowed values for the INT columns are possible.
It does not handle NULLs correctly. If COL1 is NULL for row 1 and COL2 is NULL for row 2 then both rows will be converted to a NULL string. I believe that correct handling of NULLs is the hardest part of converting the entire row correctly.
It does not handle NULLs correctly. If COL1 is NULL for row 1 and COL2 is NULL for row 2 then both rows will be converted to a NULL string. I believe that correct handling of NULLs is the hardest part of converting the entire row correctly. All allowed values for the INT columns are possible.