I've got a free text index on a table that is taking 15-30 % of processing becuase there is a lot of insert activity on this table at the moment.
I know the indexer backs off if the server gets busy - or so the theory goes.
Is there a way for me to tell it to take more of a back seat?
history.ix, index_a.ix, index_d_1.ix, index_di_1.ix, index_i_2.ix,
index_k_2.ix, index_kl_1.ix, index_klh_2.ix, index_n.ix,
index_r_l.ix, index_sv.ix, index_v.ix, index_v_ix.log, indexlog.dat.
This index files are created in my hidden folder. Now, my problem is,
1) Is this files associated with Full Text Search.
2) when the file will be created.
3) For what purpose, this files are stored.
I have a data table in my project that has a "text" (not varchar) field in it. I am trying to load this field with little paragraphs of text for showing on my pages. How do I get the free text loaded into the table? The database explorer and all the data grid controls cut the text off at one line. There doesn't seem to be any way to get multiline text into this table.
View 2 Replies View Related
Dear All.
We had Teradata 4700 SMP. We have moved data from TD to MS_SQL SERVER 2003. records are 19.65 Millions.
table is >> Order_Dtl
Columns are:-
Client_ID varchar 10
Order_ID varchar 50
Order_Sub_ID decimal
.....
...
..
.
Pk is (ClientID+OrderId+OrderSubID)
Web Base application or PDA devices use to initiate the order from all over the country. The issue is this table is not Partioned but good HP with 30 GB RAM is installed. this is main table that receive 18,0000 hits or more. All brokers and users are using this table to see the status of their order.
The always search by OrderID, or ClientID or order_SubNo, or enter any two like (Client_ID+Order_Sub_ID) or any combination.
Query takes to much time when ever server receive more querys. some orther indexes are also created on the same table like (OrderDate, OrdCreate Date and Status)
My Question are:-
Q1. IF Person "A" query to DB on Client_ID, then what Index will use ? (If any one do Query on any two combination like Client_ID+Order_ID, So what index will be uesd.? How does MS-SQL SERVER deal with these kind of issues.?
Q2. If i create 3 more indexes on ClientID, ORderID and OrdersubID. will this improve the performance of query.if person "A" search record on orderNo so what index will be used. (Mind it their would be 3 seprate indexes for Each PK columns) and composite-Clustered index is also available.?
Q3. I want to check what indexes has been used? on what search?
Q4. How can i check what table was populated when, or last date of update (DML)?
My Limitation is i Dont Create a Partioned table. I dont have permission to do it.
In Teradata we had more than 4 tb record of CRM data with no issue. i am not new baby in db line but not expert in sql server 2003.
I am thank u to all who read or reply.
Arshad
Manager Database
Esoulconsultancy.com
(Teradata Master)
10g OCP
My SSIS package is running very slow taking so much time to execute, One task is taking 2hr for inserting 100k records, i have disabled unused index still it is taking time.I am rebuilding/Refreshing indexes and stats once in month if i try to execute on daily basis will it improve my SSIS Package performance?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI am new to mssql server. There is a table on one of my databases that occupies a lot of space. And the space usage is as follows: (all values in KB)
reserved: 42329064
data: 16272288
index: 26050032
unused: 6744
This table takes up almost 80% of my database size, and the information is this table just captures the time spent by a user on the website(not very critical data)
I would like to know how to delete the entire index (which is what is occupying most space) to free up disk space. the index is a clustered index.
I hope i'm in the right place, but thanks anyway....
Actually i have 2 questions (regarding sql-server Indices/Keys):
1) I have an index, which is consisted of 4 columns.
I've read elsewhere that this index functions (as well) as an index (single column
index) on the first column of this multi-column index.
Does this mean that if i'd like to have (in addition) Indices on all of the 4 columns
seperately i need to define only 3???
2) I have a unique key consisted of multiple columns.
I'd like to save an index to this combination of columns as well (to speed up
things in DB...).
Does the definition of a multiple-columns key free me from defining the multiple-
columns index???
can anyone explain the main diference between Keys and Indices???
I hope i'm in the right place, but thanks anyway....
Actually i have 2 questions (regarding sql-server Indices/Keys):
1) I have an index, which is consisted of 4 columns.
I've read elsewhere that this index functions (as well) as an index (single column
index) on the first column of this multi-column index.
Does this mean that if i'd like to have (in addition) Indices on all of the 4 columns
seperately i need to define only 3???
2) I have a unique key consisted of multiple columns.
I'd like to save an index to this combination of columns as well (to speed up
things in DB...).
Does the definition of a multiple-columns key free me from defining the multiple-
columns index???
can anyone explain the main diference between Keys and Indices???
thanks,
Ran Kizi
Hi I have a .net 2 website that works from a sql 2000 db. I am building a form that will allow the user to type in any search criteria and based on their input I need to produce some results (that’s the simplest way to put it)I will need to search various parts of my db to find similar sounding information, I was just wondering what is the best way to do this. I had the following thoughts1) Search columns using Soundex tsql function (but not sure how good this is?)2) Remove all noise words from user input (eg, and, or, the etc...) and then use a regular expression to search the fields in the dbAlternatively are their some third party components to do can do this for me Many thanks in advance
does anyone have code that shows how to separate individual words from a sentence.
e.g. i have a list of questions and answers in my database and have the following query for it:
SELECT question, Answer
FROM QuestionsAnswer
WHERE FREETEXT(Question, 'i want to travel around the world and learn about cooking')
so i want to extend the above query so that takes each key word (travel, cooking, learn) to find out how frequently that particular word appears in the question (for ranking purposes).
I know freetexttable does rank results, but they don't seem accurate enough for what i need to do.
HELP!!!
Hi,
I have a parameter that get his available values from a query.
I want that user will have the option to select from the values list OR to type in his own value.
Is there a way to do that?
Thanks,
I have created a stored procedure which should accepts a search friendly string to be used in a free text search. I am using
DSPerson AS FT_TBL INNER JOIN CONTAINSTABLE (DSPerson, [FiftyWords], @FiftyWords ,50 ) AS KEY_TBL ON FT_TBL.PersonID = KEY_TBL.[KEY] WHERE FT_TBL.PersonID != @PersonID ORDER BY KEY_TBL.RANK DESC
Now the problem here is that the parameter @FiftyWords should be able to accept a string such as
'"Love" OR "Hate" OR "Customer Service"'
Notice the start and end of the query with single quotes and concepts should be between double quotes. Now this works OK inside SQL Query Analyzer, but try to get this right building such a string within ASP.NET and passing it as a parameter to SQL. In SQL profiler it comes out all weird with more quotes than originally built on asp side (errror obviously). Furthermore, I can't find an escape sequence that comes out right on the SQL side.
Any ideas of how to fix this??
Hello,
I have an address search on my website which is free text, so you could type in either a postcode or an address, examples would be:
"L1 3GB""Oxford Road""Oxford Road London""Oxford Road, London" - note the comma
At the moment I have a sproc (see below) which works if a user types in just a postcode, e.g. "L1 3GB" or just a street name, e.g. "Oxford Road", but if a users types in "Oxford Road London" or "Oxford Road, London" my search will return no data.
Can anyone advise how I can make my query work more effectively and work with more than just the most basic of input data?
Thanks Marco
SELECT Upper(Postcode) as 'Postcode', Upper(Address1) as 'Address1', Upper(Address2) as 'Address2', Upper(Address3) as 'Address3', Upper(Address4) as 'Address4', Upper(Address5) as 'Address5'FROM PostcodeWHERE (Address1 = @address) OR (Address2 = @address) OR (Postcode = @address)
Hi All,
I 'm working to improve some sql performance.
One of the major syntax inside the SELECT statment is ..
WHERE FIELDA IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='A') AND
WHERE FIELDB IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='B') AND
WHERE FIELDC IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='C') AND
WHERE FIELDD IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='D') AND
WHERE FIELDE IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='E') AND
WHERE FIELDF IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='F')
(It's to compare the field content with some user input parameter inside a parameter table... )
I think properly is that the SELECT ... IN is causing much slowness in the sql statement. I have indexed FIELDA , FIELDB, FILEDC etc and those PARAVALUE and PARATYPE in the PARATABLE table. But perfromance is still slow and execution takes >20 seconds for 200000 rows of records.
Do any one know if still any chance to improvide the performance like this?
Much Thanks,
Andy
Anyone have any recommendations on how to bring together a search across multiple tables? Like I'd love to do a search where i searched for the product name, company name or tag all in one query (though all are in separate tables)... is that possible? Individually, it's easy, but combined it's very hard.
View 3 Replies View Relatedis it possible to use a full-text search query on two tables at the same time? for example, say i have a table of items, and another table of descriptions... would i be able to search both those tables for a string in one query? they are currently in indexed in separate catalogs, would i need to put them both in one?
thanks
Hi
I have a new client with an existing system that has just over 2 million business listings in one table. Each business listing is associated with one business category.
* Company Table (around 20 fields):
companyID
companyName
categoryID
state
postCode
etc.
* Category Table (5 fields)
categoryID
categoryName
etc.
We are using MSSQL 2005 Express Edition with Advanced Services
A free text search needs to be performed on the companyName and categoryName limited by region (state and or postcode).
1) What kind of response times should I expect for the free text search (I have not used the free text search before)
2) How should I index the companyName and categoryName so they are both used in a joined query? i.e. Do I just configure the free text search index on each field separately and it should work?
Any suggestions appreciated.
Best Regards
Kevan
there is a free text column in the source
A sampe record
"
Try to login to the Operational Risk System- EDCS system (https://oprisk4-dev.ny.ssmb.com:26539/siteminderagent/forms/login.fcc?TYPE=33554433&REALMOID=06-000f3e21-1533-1105-9e71-8088cb990008&GUID=&SMAUTHREASON=0&METHOD=GET&SMAGENTNAME=$SM$ZlvK8bQN3Gx6kXd9LY%2fFTznf3Vi5QSreVbn0vxHs7IUR6gJ9ncq2qnEXtM4wBS0%2fGP%2bU8qMBqC8%3d&TARGET=$SM$%2foprcs%2fjsp%2fcs%2ejsp"), but get the following after entering my id and password:
The page cannot be displayed
There is a problem with the page you are trying to reach and it cannot be displayed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please try the following:
Open the oprisk4-dev.ny.ssmb.com:26539 home page, and then look for links to the information you want.
Click the Refresh button, or try again later.
Click Search to look for information on the Internet.
You can also see a list of related sites.
HTTP 500 - Internal server error
Internet Explorer
"
The above record has to inserted into the destination but SSIS gives error.
The above is record from an excel file
while importing it directly also gives error.
Can someone help me.
I am using Full Text Index to index emails stored in BLOB column in a table. Index process parses stored emails, and, if there is one or more files attached to the email these documents get indexed too. In result when I'm querying the full text index for a word or phrase I am getting reference to the email containing the word of phrase if interest if the word was used in the email body OR if it was used in any document attached to the email.
How to distinguish in a Full Text query that the result came from an embedded document rather than from "main" document? Or if that's not possible how to disable indexing of embedded documents?
My goal is either to give a user an option if he or she wants to search emails (email bodies only) OR emails AND documents attached to them, or at least clearly indicate in the returned result the real source where the word or phrase has been found.
I am looking to filter the query using the free text predicate Contains for one of the column that have dimensions of the items. The query is something like
Select * from sampletable
where contains(filtercolumn, 'Near("*cm , *cm , *cm , *Kg.",10,True)')
Data in the filtercolumn is something like 64cm x 25cm x 35cm = 10Kg.
The query do not return any data.I also tried running the below query to see if cm* can be searcher for, but with no result again
Select * from sampletable
where contains(filtercolumn,, '"cm*"')
If I do something like below, it does return all columns that have 35cm within the text.
Select * from sampletable
where contains(filtercolumn,, '"35cm"')
Dear All,
I am facing one problem with reporting services 2005 (SSRS), When i try to pass a parameter to Cube which is built in SSAS, i can not use a parameter where i can type the value instead of choosing it from a dimension.
Any way we can type the value for parameter, instead choosing from the drop down? If can, then how can we create the parameter? and how can i write a MDX to read it?
Thanks.
Regards,
Swarna.
Quick question about the primary purpose of Full Text Index vs. Clustered Index.
The Full Text Index has the purpose of being accessible outside of the database so users can query the tables and columns it needs while being linked to other databases and tables within the SQL Server instance.
Is the Full Text Index similar to the global variable in programming where the scope lies outside of the tables and database itself?
I understand the clustered index is created for each table and most likely accessed within the user schema who have access to the database.
Is this correct?
I am kind of confused on why you would use full text index as opposed to clustered index.
Thank you
Goldmember
I have a small table (600 rows) that is used in a query with a relatively large table (200,000 rows). Strangely, I get the best performance from the query by removing all indexes from the small table (including the primary key). This seems a little odd to me, and I'm wondering if this is a common scenario, and if there is some general rule that can be applied when indexing small tables.
I have tried changing the primary key index (clustered vs nonclustered) and adding other indexes to both tables, but I always get the best performance by removing all indexes from the small table. The performance difference is significant, execution time goes from 2 seconds to just over 1 second, and this is a query that gets executed quite a bit.
I can't delete the PK index as the table needs a PK for data integrity reasons. So I'm not sure how to achieve the non-index performance without removing the index.
Any suggestions would be much appreciated. By the way it's SQL Server 2005 Express.
I have read that you get better performance with unique indexes rather than non-unique indexes.
I have experimented with this in SQL 2000. I have two identical tables (with about 250000 rows each) with a 12-character unique column. In one table I define it as a regular index and in the other I define it as a unique index. No matter what I try I get identical performance, and the query optimizer shows an identical plan.
I even tried clauses such as
WHERE 1 < (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM TheTable
WHERE key_column = OtherTable.key_column)
which should obviously return nothing if TheTable.key_column is unique. However the query still ran a long time no matter if the index is unique or not.
I have also tried a unique constraint instead of a unique index and got the same (non)results.
Can anyone come up with an example where creating a unique index actually makes a performance difference?
We run an order entry system, and as such our Order Detail table comprises
over half of the data in the system. This isn't gigantic, about 1.5
gigabytes, but our performance problems are centering on this table.
My question is, does it make a difference how selective the clustered index
is in terms of insert performance. Our clustered index is on item_id.
There are around 200 items that can be ordered. This is reasonable
selectivity, but still there will be many pages of rows all having the
same value for the clustered index. Is there a performance penalty for
SQL Server having to choose one of the pages to store a record? Does
anybody know how it chooses which page to store a record on in the situation
where there are multiple pages with the same index value for the clustered
index?
Thanks...
ben
I'm using the Database Engine Tuning Advisor to do some performance evaluation on my database. I have one particular table that will potentially have a couple million rows. but this may not occur for a few months to a year from now.
when i run the advisor with 1.5 million rows, it recommends that i add an index across all columns in this table (covering index) for an estimated 91% improvement. when i run it with 1500 rows in it, it recommends that i add an index on 2 key columns for an 8% improvement.
how should i reconcile this? can i have both and what does that do to performance?
Hey guys,
Having some trouble with indexes on sql server 2005. I'll explain it with a simplified example.
I have a customers table, and a sp to list customers :
create table Customers(
CusID int not null,
Name varchar(50) null,
Surname varchar(50) null,
CusNo int not null,
Deleted bit not null
)
create proc spCusLs (
@CusID int = null,
@Name varchar(50) = null,
@Surname varchar(50) = null,
@CusNo int = null
)
as
select
CusID,
Name,
Surname,
CusNo
from
Customers
where
Deleted = 0
and CusID <> 1000
and (@CusID is null or CusID = @CusID)
and (@CusNo is null or CusNo = @CusNo)
and (@Name is null or Name like @Name)
and (@Surname is null or Surname like @Surname)
order by
Name,
Surname
create nonclustered index ix_customers_name on customers ([name] asc)
with (sort_in_tempdb = off, drop_existing = off, ignore_dup_key = off, online = off) on primary
create nonclustered index ix_customers_surname on customers (surname asc)
with (sort_in_tempdb = off, drop_existing = off, ignore_dup_key = off, online = off) on primary
create nonclustered index ix_customers_cusno on customers (cusno asc)
with (sort_in_tempdb = off, drop_existing = off, ignore_dup_key = off, online = off) on primary
I've recently noticed that some tables, including 'Customers' don't have indexes except primary keys. And I have added indexes to "name", "surname" and "cusno" columns. This has dropped the number of IO reads. But the strange thing is; one time it works with name / surname searches like ('joh%' '%') but when CusNo is included, it does a full scan. And vice versa when the SP is recompiled using 'alter', works ok with CusNo, but not with name/surname. Recompile it, and it's reversed again. When run as a single query, the execution plan looks different.
What's happening? Perhaps something to do with statistics? This doesn't have a big payload on the server, but there are some other procs suffering from this on heavy queries, making server performance worse than before...
Hi Guys,
I have a SQL 2000 sp3a server on Windows 2000 sp4. Running dual proc server with hyper threading enabled, 3gb memory attached to a HP EVA 5000 SAN.
One of the tables is 67gb and contains 140,000,000 rows. Recently someone dropped the clustered indexe so i`m trying to put it back (i've dropped the non clustered indexes as no point leaving them there whilst clustered builds).
The problem i am having is the rebuild is taking forever!! It ran for 23 hours before someone rebooted the server (!). The database is currently recovering from the reboot but i need to work out what is causing the appalling performance so i can get the index rebuilt. There are no reported hardware problems.....
There are multiple file groups involved and i found i was getting an extent allocation rate of 1.5 extents a second and same for deallocation.
Any advice on how to trouble shoot this?
Hi guys,
My company is currently migrating from Interbase to SQL Server 2005. During the migration we have came across a rather peculiar issue and wondering if anyone can advise.
We have a table.. named "prospect" which holds client information
We have a stored procedure which hangs on the following statement.
DECLARE @surname char(25);
SET @surname='BLAH%';
SELECT *
FROM Prospect
WHERE c_surname LIKE @surname;
The above takes 28 seconds to run. The following statement returns a result inside a second.
SELECT *
FROM Prospect
WHERE c_surname LIKE 'BLAH%';
In Interbase, the original returned the answer within a second too. The schema in both database is the same.
The 1st statement does not use an index! The execution plan is different to the 2nd statement. I am aware I can create an index recommended by the Database Engine Tuning which solves the issue or specify the index to use in the original statement but why does the engine not use the correct index if there is a variable involved? I need to know as we have just started looking at the code.
Thanks,
Kalim
Hello,
I found this code in a Microsoft document about index perfromance in SQL 2005. Can some one explain what iss returned by this statement, in relation to what I should do with this data to create/improve indexes? I am not sure based on the results what the columns mean as far as what needs to be done to indexes. What is the equality_columns, included_columns, statement, etc information? Do I make an index for the included_columns? Any help would be appreciated.
Here is the code:
-- Potentially Useful Indexes
select d.*
, s.avg_total_user_cost
, s.avg_user_impact
, s.last_user_seek
,s.unique_compiles
from sys.dm_db_missing_index_group_stats s
,sys.dm_db_missing_index_groups g
,sys.dm_db_missing_index_details d
where s.group_handle = g.index_group_handle
and d.index_handle = g.index_handle
order by s.avg_user_impact desc
go
--- suggested index columns and usage
declare @handle int
select @handle = d.index_handle
from sys.dm_db_missing_index_group_stats s
,sys.dm_db_missing_index_groups g
,sys.dm_db_missing_index_details d
where s.group_handle = g.index_group_handle
and d.index_handle = g.index_handle
select *
from sys.dm_db_missing_index_columns(@handle)
order by column_id
Hello all.
I have the following table
Create Table Item(
I_AssetCode NVarChar(40) Primary Key NOT NULL,
I_Name NVarChar(160),
I_BC nvarchar(20),
I_Company nvarchar(20)
);
Create Index ind_Item_Name on Item(I_Name);
Create Index ind_Item_BC on Item(I_BC);
Create Index ind_Item_Company on Item(I_Company);
It is populated with 50 000 records.
Searching on indexed columns is fast, but I've run into the following problem:
I need to get all distinct companies in the table.
I've tried with these two queries, but they both are very slow!
1. "select I_Company from item group by I_Company " - This one takes 19 seconds
2. "select distinct(I_Company) from item" -This one takes 29 secons
When I ran them through the SQL Management Studio and checked the performance plan, I saw that the second one doesn't use index at all ! So I focused on the first...
The first one used index (it took it 15% of the time), but then it ran the "stream aggregate" which took 85% of the time !
Actully 15% of 19 seconds - about 2 seconds is pretty much enough for me. But it looks that aggregate function is run for nothing!
So is it possible to force the query engine of the SSCE not to run it, since there is actually no aggregate functions in my select clause?
According to SQL CE Books online:
Group By
"Specifies the groups (equivalence classes) that output rows are to be placed in. If aggregate functions are included in the SELECT clause <select list>, the GROUP BY clause calculates a summary value for each group."
It seems the aggregate is run every time, not only when there is an aggregate function.
Is this a bug?
Thanks in advance,
TipoMan
hello
in Full Text Search
Are there method when add record in Field for properties "Full Text Index " , update catalogs ?
thanks
I am trying to enable full text index on all of my databases but notices that it is grayed out. Also the service Full Text Index service msftesql.exe is not installed. I have tried running the install again but it says nothing has changed on the machine so it just stops the install... Hope someone can help me.
View 4 Replies View Related