Clustered Index And Physical Storage

Wayne Sheffield busts a myth:

In several of my last few blog posts, I’ve shared several methods of getting internal information from a database by using the DBCC PAGE command and utilizing the “WITH TABLERESULTS” option to be allowed to automate this process for further processing. This post will also do this, but in this case, we’ll be using it to bust a common myth—data in a clustered index is physically stored on disk in the order of the clustered index.

Busting this myth

To bust this myth, we’ll create a database, put a table with a clustered index into this database, and then we’ll add some rows in random order. Next, we will show that the rows are stored on the pages in logical order, and then we’ll take a deeper look at the page internals to see that the rows are not stored in physical order.

Read on for the proof.

Related Posts

Unused Indexes Might Not Be

Tara Kizer has a warning for people eager to drop “unused” indexes: About 10 years ago, I decided to drop an unused index on a table that had 2 billion rows. The database was around 7TB in size. We were having storage and performance issues. I thought I could help the system out if I […]

Read More

Hybrid Columnstore And B+ Tree Designs

Adrian Colyer reviews a Microsoft paper on the combination of columnstore and B+ tree indexes on a single table: The authors conducted a series of microbenchmarks as follows: scans with single predicates with varying selectivity to study the trade-off between the range scan of a B+ tree vs a columnstore scan sort and group-by queries […]

Read More


February 2017
« Jan Mar »