Re: When should one rebuild an index?

From: Shakespeare <>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:22:35 +0100
Message-ID: <495b47ec$0$195$>

Bob Jones schreef:

> "DA Morgan" <> wrote in message 

>> Bob Jones wrote:
>>> "DA Morgan" <> wrote in message 
>>>> Bob Jones wrote:
>>>>> I am not surprised you reached this conclusion based on only the 
>>>>> example above.
>>>> Rerun my demo and include any and all columns you wish. Then, using
>>>> those columns and the data they contain, make your case as to how it
>>>> constitutes sufficient information to determine an index should be
>>>> rebuilt.
>>> Sufficient information? Are we changing the topic again?

>> You may be ... I haven't wavered an angstrom.
> Really? From irrelevance to sufficient information seems to be quite a shift 
> to me.
>>> What a simplistic approach to tuning. If I can make a conclusion that 
>>> INDEX_STATS is useless just base on a Mickey Mouse example without any 
>>> other data, life would be easy. Anyone has a crystal ball to lend?

>> Perhaps you should reread this thread from the beginning.

>> To be honest, and I should be, I intentionally let this thread mislead
>> the conversation just to see if anyone had actually used ANALYZE INDEX
>> to make these decisions.

>> Given that I introduced a flagrant and obvious error the result to that
>> question is clear.

>> The functionality that might be used is ANALYZE INDEX <index_name>
>> says what needs to be said.

>> But, having run a full battery of tests using COMPUTE STATISTICS I will
>> state, here and for the record, that it too provides a metrics that are
>> not a reliable source of information as to whether an index would
>> benefit from a rebuild.
> Neither of us need to reread the thread. I think it is very clear to 
> everyone now. 

Yes, very clear to everyone, so no need to go on with this discussion......

Shakespeare Received on Wed Dec 31 2008 - 04:22:35 CST

Original text of this message