Re: Reverse Key Index

From: y <y_at_y.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 12:24:14 GMT
Message-ID: <3D944DB3.F80CC2B6@y.com>

Thanks, Jim!

Jim Kennedy wrote:

> Because the tree will be more balanced when the numbers are not sequential.
> So if you reverse the number then it is not sequential if the numbers are of
> reasonable size.
> eg 123, 124, 125, 126
> becomes
> 321, 421, 521, 621
> Jim
> "y" <y_at_y.com> wrote in message news:3D93A7E7.E9E9B35B_at_y.com...
> > Hi,
> > Suppose I hava a table which contains sequential numbers. And I need
> > build an index on that column. I checked the manual, still can not
> > understand why RKI(Reverse Key Index) can build more evenly distributed
> > index tree than a B-tree.
> > Any help would be appreciated!
> >
> >
> >
> >
Received on Fri Sep 27 2002 - 07:24:14 CDT