clustered-index

I'm reading all about how clustered indexes work, and think they would be beneficial to my app. I understand that primary keys are automatically clustered indexes, but how would you add a clustered index to a non-primary key column? I.e. a datastore for user posts. Each post has a ID, but also has a user-id, but since users can post multiple times, the user-id is not a primary key. How would you add a clustered index to the user-id, and is that even a good idea? According to Clustered and Secondary Indexes , you can have only one clustered index per table. All indexes other than the clustered

I am working on a database that usually uses GUIDs as primary keys. By default SQL Server places a clustered index on primary key columns. I understand that this is a silly idea for GUID columns, and that non-clustered indexes are better. What do you think - should I get rid of all the clustered indexes and replace them with non-clustered indexes? Why wouldn't SQL's performance tuner offer this as a recommendation? A big reason for a clustered index is when you often want to retrieve rows for a range of values for a given column. Because the data is physically arranged in that order, the rows

I'm using psql to access a postgres database. When viewing the metadata of a table, is there any way to see whether an index of a table is a clustered index? I heard that the PRIMARY KEY of a table is automatically associated with a clustered index, is it true? araqnid Note that PostgreSQL uses the term "clustered index" to use something vaguely similar and yet very different to SQL Server. If a particular index has been nominated as the clustering index for a table, then psql's \d command will indicate the clustered index, e.g., Indexes: "timezone_description_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree

I know primary differences between clustered and non clustered indexes and have an understanding of how they actually work. I understand how clustered and non-clustered indexes improve read performance. But one thing I am not sure is that what would be the reasons where I would choose one over the other. For example: If a table does not have a clustered index, should one create a non-clustered index and whats the benefit of doing marc_s I just want to put in a word of warning: please very carefully pick your clustered index! Every "regular" data table ought to have a clustered index, since

This question already has an answer here: What are the differences between a clustered and a non-clustered index? 12 answers I need to add proper index to my tables and need some help. I'm confused and need to clarify a few points: Should I use index for non-int columns? Why/why not I've read a lot about clustered and non-clustered index yet I still can't decide when to use one over the other. A good example would help me and a lot of other developers. I know that I shouldn't use indexes for columns or tables that are often updated. What else should I be careful about and how can I know that

What are the differences between a clustered and a non-clustered index ? Clustered Index Only one per table Faster to read than non clustered as data is physically stored in index order Non Clustered Index Can be used many times per table Quicker for insert and update operations than a clustered index Both types of index will improve performance when select data with fields that use the index but will slow down update and insert operations. Because of the slower insert and update clustered indexes should be set on a field that is normally incremental ie Id or Timestamp. SQL Server will