Non-Clustered Index Design

Derik Hammer has an article on non-clustered index design:

In general, non-clustered indexes are a positive force in your database. Indexes are a form of data duplication, however, which costs disk space. In addition, non-clustered indexes need to be maintained. This can increase the number of writes which occur during INSERT or UPDATE operations and increase the number of index rebuilds or reorganizations that need to be performed.

Create non-clustered indexes to support all of your queries but be careful not to create duplicates and regularly purge indexes which are no longer necessary.

Worth reading the whole thing.

Related Posts

The (Un)Importance of Index Fragmentation

Tibor Karaszi argues that index fragmentation is a less serious issue than most DBAs think: You know the story. Every week or so, we defragment the indexes. Many of us uses Ola Hallengren’s great script for this, some uses Maintenance Plans, and there are of course other alternatives as well. But are we just wasting […]

Read More

The Performance Hit From Ignoring Duplicate Keys

Paul White explains why there is a big performance hit when using IGNORE_DUP_KEY on clustered indexes: The IGNORE_DUP_KEY index option can be specified for both clustered and nonclustered unique indexes. Using it on a clustered index can result in much poorer performance than for a nonclustered unique index. The size of the performance difference depends on how […]

Read More

Categories

September 2016
MTWTFSS
« Aug Oct »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930