|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> So, now that we've got all that out of the way, I'm sure you'll agree
>> with me that there are times when you do *not* want to use an index,
>> even if there is one. ;-)
>
> <g> No.
>
> Dunno about Oracle, but in SQL Server it's possible (and recommended) to
> make the table into an index that contains, at the leaf levels, all of the
> data in the table. It's called the clustered index.
Oracle provides an "index-organised table" which sounds like it's
similar. I don't know about "recommended" though - it seems to be more
for special situations.
I still think if you have a huge table with an index in just one field,
full-scanning the table would be faster than an index scan if you're
processing a very large percentage of the table's rows. But apparently
that's just me. :-}
BTW, what does "<g>" mean? I always thought it was short for "Gail" or
something, but that doesn't make much sense...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |