Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


Join's and Index's


Join's and Index's

Author
Message
dwilliscp
dwilliscp
SSC-Addicted
SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 424 Visits: 767
I am fuzzy on this.. so looking to see if my thoughts are correct... When looking at the execution plan, it does not ask for an index, but...

If you have two moderate (500K to 1M) tables, and both are a heap, wouldn't it help the inner join to have index's on what is being joined? If it matters, one is a temp table (#temp) so it would already exist in memory.. one would hope.
GilaMonster
GilaMonster
SSC-Forever
SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 47343 Visits: 44392
Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on the rows involved, the join type, other filters, complexity of the query, data types and a few other things. Add indexes, see if they help.

Temp tables are not necessarily memory resident, but anything that they query processor operates on will be in memory, temp or permanent, the query processor doesn't know what a disk is.

Ignoring joins, the permanent table needs a clustered index.


Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
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


dwilliscp
dwilliscp
SSC-Addicted
SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 424 Visits: 767
Thanks... BTW it is an inner join. I have already sent a request off to the software company to see if we can create a PK. Currently there is not one. I will see about a clustered index, if we can not get a PK put into place.
GilaMonster
GilaMonster
SSC-Forever
SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)SSC-Forever (47K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 47343 Visits: 44392
You really should have both on a permanent table. Maybe as one and the same thing, maybe different.


Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
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


dwilliscp
dwilliscp
SSC-Addicted
SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)SSC-Addicted (424 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 424 Visits: 767
Thanks for your help.. BTW I put a covering index into place, but the job that inserts data into that table grew from 30min to 90min (give or take a few min). So I have removed the covering index, and the run time is back down. While the difference in run time of this query is only about 2min. Given that this query only runs once per day.. I am going to leave the covering index off.
MMartin1
MMartin1
Ten Centuries
Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1.1K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1120 Visits: 2015
Maybe the clustered index that re-arranged the pages created disk fragmentation?

----------------------------------------------------
How to post forum questions to get the best help
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search