Subject | Re: [IB-Architect] Index types |
---|---|
Author | Ann Harrison |
Post date | 2000-08-28T01:49:51Z |
At 08:50 PM 8/25/2000 -0300, Elifarley C. Coelho wrote:
My inclination is not to get into hashed and clustered indexes because
they're sensitive to load and require monitoring and correcting. The
B* trees perform quite well under frequent updates, and with the bit-map
retrieval, they offer many of the advantages of clustering without the
disadvantages, and offer the advantages for all indexes on a table, not
just one.
Ann
InterBase is a registered trademark of Inprise Corporation.
_______________________________________________
Ib-architect mailing list
Ib-architect@...
http://mers.com/mailman/listinfo/ib-architect
>I think it would be nice if we could choose the index structure in CREATEThe default is a B* tree - which is also the only structure supported.
>INDEX statements, like whether it should be a sorted, hashed, or B+ tree
>based index, whether it should be clustered or unclustered, sparse or
>dense...
>
>We could get some performance improvement by fine-tuning these settings, I
>suppose. (A hashed index would perform better than a sorted index in a table
>with frequent updates, for instance)
>
>
>BTW, what's the default index structure in IB6?
My inclination is not to get into hashed and clustered indexes because
they're sensitive to load and require monitoring and correcting. The
B* trees perform quite well under frequent updates, and with the bit-map
retrieval, they offer many of the advantages of clustering without the
disadvantages, and offer the advantages for all indexes on a table, not
just one.
Ann
InterBase is a registered trademark of Inprise Corporation.
_______________________________________________
Ib-architect mailing list
Ib-architect@...
http://mers.com/mailman/listinfo/ib-architect