Post reply

Stairway to SQL Server Indexes: Step 1, Introduction to Indexes

  • February 14, 2011 at 10:37 am

    #233544

    Comments posted to this topic are about the item Stairway to SQL Server Indexes: Step 1, Introduction to Indexes

  • March 16, 2011 at 12:31 am

    #1299229

    Great article...Well written.

  • March 16, 2011 at 9:36 am

    #1299454

    Well written; excellent analogies.

    I've known of indexes for quite some time (nearly 20 years; oh I'm getting old[er]!) and have implemented and used them countless times.

    I'm confident I implement indexes reasonable enough (:Whistling:), though will definitely benefit becoming more technically knowledgeable of them.

    Starting at Level 1 and moving forward, all the while with the mindset I'm 'learning' something new, will reintro and expand my skill set on the topic.

    Thx.

  • March 16, 2011 at 11:03 am

    #1299508

    Thank you for your article.

    I would appreciate some information on how to choose a clustered index and constraints.

    I have read articles about hotspots and not choosing a incrementing id and then other articles that say this was meant for 6.5. So please explain 🙂 I really don't have to deal with transactional data even for my data tables so I'm not sure that hotspots are something I need to worry about.

    I created a clustered index on the id and set is as my pk and a non clustered unique constraint on several columns that by definition have to be unique. I have read some things by Celko that I believe says incrementing fields are extraneous and he would prefer just using the compound pk. But, I like my id for foreign keys.

    I also read that size matters and if it's a small table a full table scan takes place anyway. My look up tables are small but my data tables house millions of records.

  • March 17, 2011 at 12:51 am

    #1299807

    gr8, well written

    www.sqlsuperfast.com

  • March 17, 2011 at 2:58 am

    #1299828

    Great article. Very apt 🙂 Waiting for the other all sequences 🙂

  • March 22, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    #1302092

    Thanks, I think this is the first index article genuinely written with a n00b in mind.

    I'm waiting for your next StairWay. Any idea when we should expect that?

    --
    :hehe:

  • March 22, 2011 at 12:43 pm

    #1302100

    Do a search on SqlServerCentral for:

    Stairway to SQL Server Indexes

    There seem to be 7 Steps so far.

    Also, consider checking out this entire "Stairway" series at:

    Stairway Series[/url]

    (http://www.sqlservercentral.com/stairway)

  • March 22, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    #1302105

    Oh nice! Thanks for the link.

    --
    :hehe:

  • May 24, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    #1329294

    Gary,

    There will be 15 levels (articles) in the indexing Stairway. I have delivered all 15 to the editor, Kalen Delaney, and I believe she has passed them all on to Redgate. There is always some delay while Redgate proof reads, adds graphics etc. But, I would expect to seem them all on the Stairway soon.

    Dave Durant,

    Author.

  • June 23, 2011 at 11:59 am

    #1343291

    I've been working with databases for about 15 years now, though more as a developer than a dba, and this is the first article I've read that explained indexing in a way that I understand. Well done!

  • July 5, 2011 at 12:47 pm

    #1348526

    David:

    I have to disagree that a phone book is an unclustered index.

    Unless I'm mistaken, the white pages contain data physically sorted by

    last name, first name and address. Once you access the entry

    you're looking for, you have all the data; there's no bookmark to follow.

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but that sounds like a clustered index to me.

    Thanks,

    Peter

    Peter MaloofServing Data

  • July 13, 2011 at 6:41 am

    #1352113

    Peter Maloof (7/5/2011)

    David:

    I have to disagree that a phone book is an unclustered index.

    Unless I'm mistaken, the white pages contain data physically sorted by

    last name, first name and address. Once you access the entry

    you're looking for, you have all the data; there's no bookmark to follow.

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but that sounds like a clustered index to me.

    Thanks,

    Peter

    Peter,

    I think the information we are looking for is the hat size rather than the phone number. Once we use the index to get the phone number we then have to use the phone number to get the information. He mentioned the physical houses are not in order which is why it wouldn't be clustered.

    Jess

  • July 13, 2011 at 7:05 am

    #1352130

    Jess:

    You're right. Phone books are used to demonstrate clustered indexes, so I missed the next step of getting hat sizes.

    Thanks for pointing that out.

    Peter

    Peter MaloofServing Data

  • August 2, 2011 at 6:53 am

    #1362113

    This is an excellent article that takes the abstract concept of a nonclustered index and explains it in a simple everyday example. Well done. I look forward to reading the next 14 articles this week.

    Thank you.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 27 total)

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