Post reply

A little tale and a seven questions about SQL partition

  • April 20, 2017 at 9:00 am

    #1939105

    jcb - Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:45 AM

    Comparing both databases I found all PK (all tables ID clustered indexes) has been changed to not clustered and all TOWN_ID changed to the table clustered index.
    sql guy just said the index change was necessary for the partition to work. (I have my doubts but as I said I'm ignorant in this topic)

    It kinda is, because to partition a table that has a clustered index, the clustered index must contain the partition key. But this is why I said to make sure that you test only one change at a time. Changing the clustered index to TOWN_ID probably got you all performance improvements you see, not the partitioning of the table.

    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

  • April 26, 2017 at 8:09 am

    #1939971

    null

    "Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

  • April 28, 2017 at 7:32 am

    #1940375

    Your shop started with OpenSource and migrated to Licensed Products.  

    ThanksSaurabh.D

Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 17 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply