|
|
|
Forum Newbie
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, June 23, 2012 10:54 AM
Points: 8,
Visits: 23
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSCarpal Tunnel
       
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 2:50 AM
Points: 4,785,
Visits: 1,334
|
|
Great article...Well written.
|
|
|
|
|
Grasshopper
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:50 AM
Points: 14,
Visits: 66
|
|
Well written; excellent analogies.
I've known of indexes for quite some time (nearly 20 years; oh I'm getting old[er]!) and have implemented and used them countless times.
I'm confident I implement indexes reasonable enough ( ), though will definitely benefit becoming more technically knowledgeable of them.
Starting at Level 1 and moving forward, all the while with the mindset I'm 'learning' something new, will reintro and expand my skill set on the topic.
Thx.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 1:45 PM
Points: 1,
Visits: 11
|
|
Thank you for your article. I would appreciate some information on how to choose a clustered index and constraints.
I have read articles about hotspots and not choosing a incrementing id and then other articles that say this was meant for 6.5. So please explain I really don't have to deal with transactional data even for my data tables so I'm not sure that hotspots are something I need to worry about.
I created a clustered index on the id and set is as my pk and a non clustered unique constraint on several columns that by definition have to be unique. I have read some things by Celko that I believe says incrementing fields are extraneous and he would prefer just using the compound pk. But, I like my id for foreign keys.
I also read that size matters and if it's a small table a full table scan takes place anyway. My look up tables are small but my data tables house millions of records.
|
|
|
|
|
Grasshopper
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, April 16, 2011 10:43 PM
Points: 19,
Visits: 39
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Enthusiastic
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, March 15, 2012 5:05 AM
Points: 195,
Visits: 77
|
|
Great article. Very apt Waiting for the other all sequences
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Addicted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:10 PM
Points: 480,
Visits: 1,163
|
|
Thanks, I think this is the first index article genuinely written with a n00b in mind.
I'm waiting for your next StairWay. Any idea when we should expect that?
--
|
|
|
|
|
Grasshopper
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:50 AM
Points: 14,
Visits: 66
|
|
Do a search on SqlServerCentral for: Stairway to SQL Server Indexes
There seem to be 7 Steps so far.
Also, consider checking out this entire "Stairway" series at:
Stairway Series (http://www.sqlservercentral.com/stairway)
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Addicted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:10 PM
Points: 480,
Visits: 1,163
|
|
Oh nice! Thanks for the link.
--
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, June 23, 2012 10:54 AM
Points: 8,
Visits: 23
|
|
Gary,
There will be 15 levels (articles) in the indexing Stairway. I have delivered all 15 to the editor, Kalen Delaney, and I believe she has passed them all on to Redgate. There is always some delay while Redgate proof reads, adds graphics etc. But, I would expect to seem them all on the Stairway soon.
Dave Durant, Author.
|
|
|
|