2025-06-30
389 reads
2025-06-30
389 reads
2025-06-23
480 reads
Erik shows that heaps have even more drawbacks under optimistic concurrency.
2018-02-07
2,743 reads
You should stick to using tables in SQL Server, rather than heaps that have no clustered index, unless you have well-considered reasons to choose heaps. However, there are uses for heaps in special circumstances, and it is useful to know what these uses are, and when you should avoid heaps. Uwe Ricken explains, and demonstrates why you'd be unwise to use heaps rather than tables when the data is liable to change.
2016-10-14
3,646 reads
In SQL Server, heaps are rightly treated with suspicion. Although there are rare cases where they perform well, they are likely to be the cause of poor performance. If a table is likely to have a large number of changes, then it can become fragmented due to way that space is allocated and forward pointers used. How does one detect this problem? Is it significant? How does one deal with it, if necessary? Neeraj Tripathi explains.
2015-11-23
3,694 reads
2014-05-21
1,855 reads
When no clustered index is defined on a table, that table is said to be a Heap. Heaps are not ideal when it comes to performance but there are lots of instances where you have heaps.
2013-05-15
3,128 reads
By Steve Jones
This is timely, as I’m currently on a boat in the Adriatic taking a...
You can find the slides and SQL scripts for my session “Spice up your...
By SQLPals
How to Clear the SSMS Cache (SSMS 21 and Later) Updated...
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Risk Vs Reward, The never...
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Hyperscale Replicas IV
Comments posted to this topic are about the item The SQL Server Date Magic:...
In Azure SQL Database Hyperscale Edition, how many geo-replicas can be created?
See possible answers