I don't think that was the case, Execution plans for both queries are different, Also these queries were executing frequently and I saw the difference even executing them in parallel (half queries in old way and half in new way simultaneously).
I see this is SQL Server and it will cache plan for an exact query you run. By moving date time clause to join condition you force a new plan generation.
You should be able to get same results by forcing plan recompilation
I looked at my query again and I found out that I had an extra clause NOT EXISTS which was causing difference in speed and plans, omitting not EXISTS didn't make difference in speed in both cases.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I don't think that was the case, Execution plans for both queries are different, Also these queries were executing frequently and I saw the difference even executing them in parallel (half queries in old way and half in new way simultaneously).
Plans have obviously have to be different.
I see this is SQL Server and it will cache plan for an exact query you run. By moving date time clause to join condition you force a new plan generation.
You should be able to get same results by forcing plan recompilation
I looked at my query again and I found out that I had an extra clause
NOT EXISTSwhich was causing difference in speed and plans, omittingnot EXISTSdidn't make difference in speed in both cases.