I've found that, especially for large tables, even if only 30-50% of the table is going to be deleted, it's usually much more effective to use the copy-swap-and-drop method because, done correctly, it can still be twice (or more) as fast and a whole lot easier on the transaction log if you make an excursion to the BULK LOGGED Recovery Model and take advantage of "Minimal Logging" with the Clustered Index already in place.
IMHO, the jury is still out on the use of TF 610 for other indexes. It's usually faster just to rebuild the NCIs while in the BULK LOGGED Recovery Model.
is pronounced ree-bar and is a Modenism for R
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code: Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column.
If you think its expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. -- Red Adair
When you put the right degree of spin on it, the number 318
is also a glyph that describes the nature of a DBAs job. Helpful Links:
How to post code problemsHow to post performance problemsForum FAQs