Re: Index management

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:<409a296e$0$4543$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Mike Ault" <mikerault_at_earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:37fab3ab.0405051352.11555818_at_posting.google.com...
>
> > Other than violating relational tenents, reordering table data will
> > dramatically improve access times in many cases. Of course as the
> > table ages it must be rebuilt over and over again, along with the
> > index, to maintain this ordering. I hope those that follow this advice
> > have lots of maintenance window time!
>
> Dunno, Mike. I won't dwell on the relational tennets: no one seems
> to care about those nowadays...

Well, maybe one guy...
http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid13_gci962948,00.html

:) (article is about Date for those who don't want to click there)

I thought the tenet was "the order is not guaranteed" as opposed to "reordering must not be done."

>
> Actually, the first time it was mentioned in the specific Oracle context
> was long before Don wrote any books: in Compuserve, in the Oracle
> User's Group that Chris Wooldridge used to run there. And where many
> "original" ideas and insights were "pinched" along the years. Not just
> on this subject either, and by a great many writers.

Still wondering if that stuff is archived anywhere. I thought it was run by Michael mumblesomebodyfromminneapolis...

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
"Marijuana has not killed anybody in the history of the world alive
today." - Joe Rogan