RE: Is table with b-tree index is still a heap table?
From: Iggy Fernandez <iggy_fernandez_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:23:58 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU179-W489B4674869C9A66352DBBEB6D0_at_phx.gbl>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:23:58 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU179-W489B4674869C9A66352DBBEB6D0_at_phx.gbl>
re: normally you want your tables to be heap tables On page 379 of Effective Oracle by Design, Tom Kyte quotes Steve Adams as saying: �If a schema has no IOTs or clusters, that is a good indication that no thought has been given to the matter of optimizing data access.� But IOTs and clusters would not be useful if the PKs are artificial keys (e.g. sequence numbers) instead of natural keys (typically composite) since the goal is a clustering effect. P.S. Every SQL Server table that has a PK automatically becomes an IOT (i.e. a "clustered index" in SQL Server terminology) which explains why the OT wondered whether the same was true of Oracle Database. Iggy -- Iggy Fernandez Email: iggy_fernandez_at_hotmail.com Cellphone: (925) 478 3161 Blog: So Many Manuals So Little Time Author of Beginning Oracle Database 11g Administration Editor of the NoCOUG Journal Lecturer at University of Washington Professional and Continuing Education ________________________________ > From: mark.powell2_at_hp.com > To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org > Subject: RE: Is table with b-tree index is still a heap table? > Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 19:56:39 +0000 > > > Nik, I agree with Hemant in that normally you want your tables to be > heap tables. Most tables should have a PK constraint defined on them --http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Wed Apr 02 2014 - 22:23:58 CEST