Re: Index management

"Richard Foote" <richard.foote_at_tbigpond.nospam.com> wrote in message news:naNlc.20002$TT.7962_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au...

> > Well, I think the thread is saying very clearly that index-level
> clustering
>snippage
> Any techniques that can group or cluster like data together so that we can
> read this data by accessing fewer blocks is a good thing providing the
> benefits we gain are not counter-balanced by the costs of maintaining such
> structures.
>
> So for example as I mention in my presentation, if by re-ordering the data
> in a table to match the order of our most "important" index via business
> critical index range scan operations, we can dramatically reduce the number
> of different data blocks we need to visit, which could then noticeably
> improves important business response times, then that's a good thing. Same
> potentially goes for some clustered data structures. Like I said, it all
> depends on the benefits vs. the maintenance costs.

Like I said: index-level clustering.
Table-level clustering is a totally different kettle.

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam