Re: Clustered Indices

In <3p7h3h$jql@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> tcummins@ix.netcom.com (Tim Cummins) writes: > >According to my manual, clustering an index will place the records in >physical order based on the index. This is a very good thing if the >table is a stable one. It means the table can be searched more quickly >along that index. It is not a good idea to cluster if the table >undergoes frequent changes. When a is record inserted or deleted, every >record after the inserted/deleted record (based on the clustered index) >must be rewritten to maintain the physical order. This could add a lot >of overhead to the system. > >Tim Cummins > I believe that the defined behavior for clustered indexes is that it is a one-time clustering at which time the entire table is re-created. As you mentioned, volatile tables are not good candidates for clustering, but the reason is that each change in the index values decreases the percentage of clustering. To regain the benefit, you must alter the index to not cluster and then alter it to cluster again. John Prideaux alastl@ix.netcom.com