Timeline for Performance difference between Clustered and Non Clustered Index
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2012 at 20:15 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackDBAs/status/207565831905869825 | ||
| May 29, 2012 at 20:08 | answer | added | Namphibian | timeline score: 44 | |
| May 29, 2012 at 20:07 | answer | added | Cade Roux | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 29, 2012 at 19:39 | comment | added | Nick Chammas | You wrote: "This means that the query engine must take an additional step in order to locate the actual data." Actually, if all you need are columns covered in the index, you don't need to take any additional steps after you find your target rows in the nonclustered index. Only when you need columns not covered by the nonclustered index does SQL Server need to perform a bookmark lookup. | |
| May 29, 2012 at 19:36 | comment | added | Aaron Bertrand | Some tangible discussion here perhaps. stackoverflow.com/questions/91688/… stackoverflow.com/questions/5070529/… stackoverflow.com/questions/1251636/… We could write a dissertation about the differences between clustered and non-clustered indexes, but I don't think we would say anything that isn't already out there available for you to read. | |
| May 29, 2012 at 19:01 | history | migrated | from stackoverflow.com (revisions) | ||
| May 29, 2012 at 17:32 | history | asked | Pankaj Garg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |