I have been adding a catalog to some table in SQL Server 2005 also it got me thinking. What's the distinction between creating 1 index and determining multiple posts over getting 1 index per column you need to index.

Exist certain explanations why you ought to be utilized within the other?

For instance

Create NonClustered Index IX_IndexName On TableName

(Column1 Asc, Column2 Asc, Column3 Asc)

Versus

Create NonClustered Index IX_IndexName1 On TableName

(Column1 Asc)

Create NonClustered Index IX_IndexName2 On TableName

(Column2 Asc)

Create NonClustered Index IX_IndexName3 On TableName

(Column3 Asc)

To be sure with Cade Roux.

This specific article should enable you to get on course.

http://world wide web.sqlskills.com/blogs/kimberly/2008/04/16/IndexesInSQLServer20052008BestPracticesPart1.aspx or http://world wide web.sqlskills.com/BLOGS/KIMBERLY/publish.aspx?id=19f0ce1c-0d2f-4ad5-9b13-a615418422e0

One factor to notice, clustered indexes must have a distinctive key(a name column I would suggest) because the first column. Essentially it will help your computer data place in the finish from the index and never cause lot's of disk IO and Page splits.

Next, if you're produced other indexes in your data and they're built cleverly they'll be used again.

e.g. imagine you search a table on three posts

condition, county, zip.

you sometimes search by condition only. you sometimes search by condition and county. you frequently search by condition, county, zip. Then a catalog with condition, county, zip. is going to be used in most three of those searches.

Should you search by zip alone quite a bit then your above index won't be used(by SQL Server anyway) as zip may be the third a part of that index and also the query optimiser won't observe that index as useful.

You can then create a catalog on Zip alone that might be used in cases like this.

I suppose the solution you're searching for is it is dependent in your where clauses of the commonly used queries and your group by's.

The content will be very convenient. :-)

Yes. I suggest you take a look at Kimberly Tripp's articles on indexing.

If the index is "covering", then there's you don't need to use not the index. In SQL Server 2005, you may also add more posts towards the index that aren't area of the key which could eliminate outings towards the relaxation from the row.

Getting multiple indexes, each on one column may imply that just one index will get used whatsoever - you'll have to make reference to the execution intend to see what effects different indexing schemes offer.

You may also make use of the tuning wizard to assist figure out what indexes will make confirmed query or workload perform the very best.

The multi-column index can be used as queries referencing all the posts:

Choose *

FROM TableName

WHERE Column1=1 AND Column2=2 AND Column3=3

This is often researched directly while using multi-column index. However, for the most part among the single-column index may be used (it would need to lookup all records getting Column1=1, after which check Column2 and Column3 in all of individuals).

One item that appears to possess been skipped is star changes. Index Intersection operators resolve the predicate by calculating the group of rows hit by each one of the predicates before any I/O is performed around the fact table. On the star schema you'd index every individual dimension key and also the query optimiser can resolve which rows to choose through the index intersection computation. The indexes on individual posts provide the best versatility with this.