Nonclustered Versus Unique NonClustered

SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.

Popular Topics

Home

Members

Calendar

Who's On

Home » SQL Server 2008 » SQL Server 2008 - General » Nonclustered Versus Unique NonClustered

20 posts, Page 1 of 2

1 2 »»

Nonclustered Versus Unique NonClustered

Rate Topic

Display Mode

Topic Options

Author

Message

sqlzealot-81

Posted Wednesday, February 16, 2011 11:32 PM

Right there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:06 AM
Points: 730, Visits: 1,706

Whats the significance of Nonclustered Versus Unique NonClustered indexes if at all possible to have a unique key(one of the column is identity)?

Post #1065445

Ian Scarlett

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 1:40 AM

Ten Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 2:12 AM
Points: 1,322, Visits: 4,400

The simple answer is that SQL Server will make sure that only one row exists for a given value if you declare the index as UNIQUE, otherwise you can have as many rows as you want with the same value.

Is there more to your question?

Post #1065487

sqlzealot-81

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 3:22 AM

Right there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:06 AM
Points: 730, Visits: 1,706

Okei, thank for your post. I found something very interesting as below:
I just changed the post little bit to have a better reading....(oops fed up with formating the same...)

In our table,

If (Unique Clustered)
If (Non - Clustered - unique)
{
Btree- Non-clustered Key
Leaf-Non Clustered Key + Clustered Key
}
else if (Non - Clustered = NonUnique )
{
Btree- Non-Clustered Key + Cluster Key
Leaf- Non-Clustered Key + Cluster Key
}

if (Non-Unique Clustered)
If(Non - Clustered = Unique)
{
Btree- Non - Clusetered Key
Leaf - Non - Clusetered Key + Cluster Key + UQI
}
else if (Non - Clustered= non unique)
{
Btree- Non - Clusetered Key + Cluster Key + UQI
Leaf- Non - Clusetered Key + Cluster Key + UQI
}

Post #1065534

Grant Fritchey

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 4:58 AM

SSChampion

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:55 AM
Points: 13,381, Visits: 25,165

Could you explain what that means please? I don't understand what you posted.

----------------------------------------------------
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." Theodore Roosevelt
The Scary DBA
Author of: SQL Server 2012 Query Performance Tuning
SQL Server 2008 Query Performance Tuning Distilled
and
SQL Server Execution Plans

Product Evangelist for Red Gate Software

Post #1065564

sqlzealot-81

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 9:52 AM

Right there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:06 AM
Points: 730, Visits: 1,706

I was just trying to convey like whats the significance of unique key while creating indexes. To me, while I was checking with DBCC IND and PAGE, I could see the above situation.

The non-clustered index key structure would be as follows:

If I have a unique clustered index index and non-unique non-clusterd index indexthen my root level will have non-clustered key + clustered key. At leaf level, non-clustered key + clustered key

If I have a unique clustered index index and unique non-clusterd index indexthen my root level will have non-clustered key . At leaf level, non-clustered key + clustered key

If I have a non-unique clustered index index and non-unique non-clusterd index indexthen my root level will have non-clustered key + clustered key + Uniquifier. At leaf level, non-clustered key + clustered key + Uniquifier.

If I have a non-unique clustered index index and unique non-clusterd index indexthen my root level will have non-clustered key . At leaf level, non-clustered key + clustered key +Uniquifier.

Correct me if am wrong....

Post #1065806

Wildcat

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 10:17 AM

Old Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 10:10 PM
Points: 307, Visits: 1,390

What you saw is CORRECT. And I am sure you know the structure of non-clustered index: the leaf level must have a clustered index key attached (if the clustered index is not unique, it must have the RID attached for the uniqueness).

Post #1065831

PaulB-TheOneAndOnly

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 10:18 AM

SSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:53 PM
Points: 2,984, Visits: 4,403

sqlchanakya (2/17/2011)

I was just trying to convey like whats the significance of unique key while creating indexes...

mmhhh... to enforce uniqueness perhaps? BigGrin

_____________________________________
Pablo (Paul) Berzukov

Author of Understanding Database Administration available at Amazon and other bookstores.

Disclaimer: Advice is provided to the best of my knowledge but no implicit or explicit warranties are provided. Since the advisor explicitly encourages testing any and all suggestions on a test non-production environment advisor should not held liable or responsible for any actions taken based on the given advice.

Post #1065832

GilaMonster

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 10:44 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:30 AM
Points: 37,725, Visits: 29,982

Wildcat (2/17/2011)

(if the clustered index is not unique, it must have the RID attached for the uniqueness).

Nope. The only time the RID is used in a nonclustered index is when the base table is a heap (no clustered index)

Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #1065854

Evil Kraig F

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 11:04 AM

SSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:35 AM
Points: 5,678, Visits: 6,125

GilaMonster (2/17/2011)

Wildcat (2/17/2011)

(if the clustered index is not unique, it must have the RID attached for the uniqueness).

Nope. The only time the RID is used in a nonclustered index is when the base table is a heap (no clustered index)

That little off the cuff statement has me doing some research...

Isn't the RID and the "uniquifier" pretty much equivalent from an overhead standpoint, being a 4 byte identifier?

That and I've seen some conflicting information about said "uniquifier" being only applied to duplicated index rows. Every time I think I've got this nailed down it slips sideways a little bit on me.

- Craig Farrell

Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.

For better assistance in answering your questions | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions. |Tally Tables
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA

Post #1065870

GilaMonster

Posted Thursday, February 17, 2011 11:25 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:30 AM
Points: 37,725, Visits: 29,982

Craig Farrell (2/17/2011)

Isn't the RID and the "uniquifier" pretty much equivalent from an overhead standpoint, being a 4 byte identifier?

No. To start with, the RID's not 4 bytes.

The RID is the row identifier. An 8 byte combination of file, page and slot. Every row has one, it is unique always. The uniquifier is a 4-byte sequential value that only appears on the rows that have duplicate clustered index key values (the first row SQL encounters won't have a uniquifier, any rows subsequent with the same clustering key will gain one, sequential value, starting at (I believe) 1. It's ony unique in combination with the clustering key, not by itself.

Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #1065876

« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

20 posts, Page 1 of 2

1 2 »»

Permissions