Can I enable the Non - Clustered Index option set to 'TRUE' at publisher does it affect anything?
Does the Non clustered Indexes are automatically transfer to the subscriber database?
Does it affects database performance when I enable this option!
Hi Guys,
I have tried backing up the replication from Primary Server (Publisher) A and copying over to Subscriber B. When I sync. I am missing the data. I don't know what step I am missing or it is bug on SQL 2K SP3.
I don't know what i am doing wrong.
Can anybody give me a step by step detail how to backup the publisher database and copy to a subscriber and sync by saying the schema and data already available. As we have WAN problem all the times, and when I try the full snapshot of 20 gig it was taking more than 24 hrs and also if the connection fails my snapshot also fails
Please help.
Thanks in Advance,
-Anu
Hi Guys,
I tried all the ways ,no good result.
I am really running out of time.
Can somebody please help.
-Anu
I have the merge replication (Push) for SQL Server 2008.The right-click option for Start and Stop Synchronizing in subscriptions has been disabled. How can I stop the merge replication and start again ?
This error happened 1 week after I created the merge replication. The merge data cannot sync to subscriber and only solution I can use is drop and re-create the merge replication again but error would be re-occur a week later. The merge replication work fine before and start from middle on May 2015, but it keep happen right now.
How to check if web merge sync is working between a subscriber and publisher thru HTTPS ? SQL port 1433 at subscriber is blocked so no direct connection to subscriber.
View 2 Replies View RelatedAt my subscriber database I found some missing Indexes if I update all the missing Indexes on subscriber DB, does it impact at on publisher side?
View 2 Replies View RelatedUsing SQL 2005 SP2. I have a publication that contains indexed views, and some other objects that query the indexed view using WITH (NOEXPAND). Currently replication fails because the CLUSTERED INDEX on the view is NOT replicated. I've experimented with various schema options but nothing changes. The view is replicated but not the clustered index on that view. I've seen some discussion on replicating indexed views to a table, but I would like to replicate indexed view schema fully. (Including the clustered index on that view). Is there a way to make this work?
View 4 Replies View Relatedthe query:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN (
SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada
WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
takes 30-60 seconds to run on my machine, due to a clustered index scan on our an index on asset [about half a million rows]. For this particular association less than 50 rows are returned.
expanding the inner select into a list of guids the query runs instantly:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN (
'0F9C1654-9FAC-45FC-9997-5EBDAD21A4B4',
'52C616C0-C4C5-45F4-B691-7FA83462CA34',
'C95A6669-D6D1-460A-BC2F-C0F6756A234D')
It runs instantly because of doing a clustered index seek [on the same index as the previous query] instead of a scan. The index in question IX_Asset_AssociationGuid is a nonclustered index on Asset.AssociationGuid.
The tables involved:
Asset, represents an asset. Primary key is AssetGuid, there is an index/FK on Asset.AssociationGuid. The asset table has 28 columns or so...
Association, kind of like a place, associations exist in a tree where one association can contain any number of child associations. Each association has a ParentAssociationGuid pointing to its parent. Only leaf associations contain assets.
AssociationDataAssociation, a table consisting of two columns, AssociationGuid, DataAssociationGuid. This is a table used to quickly find leaf associations [DataAssociationGuid] beneath a particular association [AssociationGuid]. In the above case the inner select () returns 3 rows.
I'd include .sqlplan files or screenshots, but I don't see a way to attach them.
I understand I can specify to use the index manually [and this also runs instantly], but for such a simple query it is peculiar it is necesscary. This is the query with the index specified manually:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid
FROM Asset a WITH (INDEX (IX_Asset_AssociationGuid)) WHERE
a.AssociationGuid IN (
SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada
WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
To repeat/clarify my question, why might this not be doing a clustered index seek with the first query?
I am trying to drop a primary key on column LID and then create a clustered index on a new identity column ID and then add the primary key back on the LID. I am not able to do so due the table being in replication. here is the error:
Cannot alter the table '' because it is being published for replication.
How do I get past the error and create the Clustered Index on ID column in both publisher and subscriber?
We are going to use SQL Sever change tracking. The problem is that some of our tables, which are to be tracked, have no primary keys. There are only unique clustered indexes. The question is what is the best way to turn on change tracking for these tables in our circumstances.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI desire to have a clustered index on a column other than the Primary Key. I have a few junction tables that I may want to alter, create table, or ...
I have practiced with an example table that is not really a junction table. It is just a table I decided to use for practice. When I execute the script, it seems to do everything I expect. For instance, there are not any constraints but there are indexes. The PK is the correct column.
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[tblNotificationMgr](
[NotificationMgrKey] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[ContactKey] [int] NOT NULL,
[EventTypeEnum] [tinyint] NOT NULL,
[code]....
I have created two tables. table one has the following fields,
Id -> unique clustered index.
table two has the following fields,
Tid -> unique clustered index
Id -> foreign key of table one(id).
Now I have created primary key for the table one column 'id'. It's created as "nonclustered, unique, primary key located on PRIMARY". Primary key create clustered index default. since unique clustered index existed in table one, it has created "Nonclustered primary key".
My Question is, What is the difference between "clustered, unique, primary key" and "nonclustered, unique, primary key"? Is there any performance impact between these?
I have large table with 10million records. I would like to create clustered or non-clustered index.
What is the quick way to create? I have tried once and it took more than 10 min.
please help.
Hi there, I have a table that has an IDENTITY column and it is the PK of this table. By default SQL Server creates a unique clustered index on the PK, but this isn't what I wanted. I want to make a regular unique index on the column so I can make a clustered index on a different column.
If I try to uncheck the Clustered index option in EM I get a dialog that says "Cannot convert a clustered index to a nonclustered index using the DROP_EXISTING option.". If I simply try to delete the index I get the following "An explicit DROP INDEX is not allowed on index 'index name'. It is being used for PRIMARY KEY constraint enforcement.
So do I have to drop the PK constraint now? How does that affect all the tables that have FK relationships to this table?
Thanks
Hi,
View 6 Replies View RelatedHi everybody!
I just ran the Database Engine Tuning Advisor on a relative complex query to find out if a new index might help, and in fact it found a combination that should give a performance gain of 94%. Fair enough to try that.
What I wonder about: The index I should create contains 4 columns, the last of them being the Primary Key column of the table, which is also my clustered index for the table. It is an identity integer btw.
I think I remember that ANY index does include the clustered one as lookup into the data, so having it listed to the list of columns will not help. It might at worst add another duplicate 4 bytes to each index entry.
Right? Wrong? Keep the column in the index, or remove it since it is included implicit anyway?
Thanks for suggestions!
Ralf
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
I have a table<table1> with 804668 records primary on table1(col1,col2,col3,col4)
Have created non-clustered index on <table1>(col2,col3,col4),to solve a performance issue.(which is a join involving another table with 1.2 million records).Seems to be working great.
I want to know whether this will slow down,insert and update on the <table1>?
Hi everyone,
When we create a clustered index firstly, and then is it advantageous to create another index which is nonclustered ??
In my opinion, yes it is. Because, since we use clustered index first, our rows are sorted and so while using nonclustered index on this data file, finding adress of the record on this sorted data is really easier than finding adress of the record on unsorted data, is not it ??
Thanks
I have a clustered index that consists of 3 int columns in this order: DateKey, LocationKey, ItemKey (there are many other columns in this data warehouse table such as quantities, prices, etc.).
Now I want to add a non-clustered index on just one of the other columns, say LocationKey, like this:
CREATE INDEX IX_test on TableName (LocationKey)
I understand that the clustered index keys will also be added as key columns to any NC indexes. So, in this case the NC index will also get the other two columns from the clustered index added as key columns. But, in what order will they be added?
Will the resulting index keys on this new NC index effectively be:
LocationKey, DateKey, ItemKey
OR
LocationKey, ItemKey, DateKey
Do the clustering keys get added to a NC index in the same order as they are defined in the clustered index?
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
Hello I want to learn disparity clustered index or nonclustered index and in queries which one run better.
example
select * from orders where orderID=5
to this query clustered or nonclustered
thanks
What does an index add to the performance?
Why do we use Clustered Index and Non-clustered Index?
thanks
I'm working with a legacy database whose structure I cannot change. I'm building a web-based editor for one of the DB's tables. This table has a Primary Key called "Master_Idx" that is an Identity (autonumber) field.To start, I query the DB and populate a data table which is cached. This is used to "feed" the web form. Any additions, changes, and deletions are reflected in this cached table.The user then has the flexibility to press Save at any time, which ensures that the database is modified accordingly.Here's my question:When new records are added, I assign them a Master_Idx value, the first of which was calculated to be 1 + the Max(Master_Idx) value when the editing session started. But when I insert these records back into the database it's possible that another user might have also been doing similar editing (of different records from the same table), so there's no guarantee that the Master_Idx values in the data table will be identical to those in the DB. When I insert a record from the cached table back into the DB, what technique can I use to check what value was assigned to the Master_Idx? If it's not the same as in the cached table then I need to update it locally in a few places.I hope all of this makes sense but if it doesn't then let me know and I'll explain it in another way.Robert W.
View 2 Replies View RelatedHi,
I have a small table (around 10,000 rows) that is constantly selected from, deleted from, and inserted into. Basically we fill it with content, our web application selects the content, and when we run out, we regenerate (about 50 rows at a time). We currently have a nonclustered PK on the first two columns, both INTs. How can I determine if a clustered index would be better? I am concerned about bottlenecks due to a hotspot with the nonclustered index. When our site really starts to get users, this could become a big issue. I am thinking that I could use a clustered index, and set up a job to reindex the table once every hour or so....any help is appreciated greatly.
Does anybody know if a key defined on Uniqueidentifier datatype is a good candidate for the clustered index or otherwise.
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi,
Is it advisable to create a Non Clustered Index in "ALLow NULL" column?
Thanks,
Rahul Jha
In Microsoft SQL Management Studio 2005 I have the ability to add a single non clustered index on a table on multiple columns (ordered how I want) AND/OR I may create a multiple of these non-clustered Index entries with a single column per non-clustered index.
Is there a difference between to two options? If yes, how do these options work differently? I assume option 1 is just a faster way of creating the non-clustered index and there is no architectural difference!?
Why can we have only one clustered index per table
View 4 Replies View Relatedwhat is clustered index A and B.
View 4 Replies View RelatedHi,
I have a table which I would like to index.
The table holds info of nurses:
T_NURSE=(NurseCode, LName, FName, IDNumber ...)
NurseCode => PK+Identity
Since queries will be on LName (and optionally on FName and IDNumber) I created a clustered index with this order: {LName, FName, IDNumber, NurseCode}
Questions:
1.Is it ok to have the clustered index not the PK?
2.If yes - what importance does the PK have here?
Looking for a nurse via screen (using:LName,FName,ID) or via source-code (using:NurseCode) is 50%/50%.
Which field(s) should have the honor of being a PK?
3.If I perform the search using a view (SELECT * FROM vw_Nurse) will it use the index?
Thanks,
Izik
A lot of detailed discussion explains the difference between clusteredand non-clustered indexes. But very few 'clarifies' why the term usedis 'clustered'. Well, once and for all, this is my take.*** The 'CLUSTERED' adjective refers to the INDEX being clustered (setadjacent) to the DATA.This means if you found the index, the data is already there beside it(you don't have to look anywhere else). From this note, everythinghopefully becomes clearer to you. (You can now read further in the techbook :-).So, the next time you are asked to explain what is a clustered (ornon-clustered ) index think of the above.
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi,
I have a table Student with N number of columns.
One of the column (int) is flgActive - which currently holds only 2 values either 0 / 1.
Depending on the operation I want do - I either include the where clause flgActive = 0 or flgActive = 1 in my queries. Basically I either fetch non-active students or active students.
Whenever I need to turn a student to Nonactive - flgactive column is updated to 0.
Will a non clustered index on flgActive column help in my querying - when all the records in the table is going to contain only 2 different values. (Assume that the student table holds abt 2 Million records with about 30% of the students nonactive.)
Thanks,
Loonysan