On 8-6-2012 18:07, Ann Harrison wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Alec Swan alecs...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Vlad, but this is too complicated to give as a guidance to our
customers. However, it sounds like rebuilding an index cannot require more
space that the database size itself,
On 10-6-2012 12:32, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
10.06.2012 14:09, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
* for each record (sequential read of all pages?)
* insert column value into index
Inserting unsorted / random values into the b-tree is known to be much
slower than sorting the values in advance and loading
Thanks Vlad, but this is too complicated to give as a guidance to our
customers. However, it sounds like rebuilding an index cannot require more
space that the database size itself, right?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:22 AM, hvlad hv...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
**
--- In
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Alec Swan alecs...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Vlad, but this is too complicated to give as a guidance to our
customers. However, it sounds like rebuilding an index cannot require more
space that the database size itself, right?
On a bad day, yes it could. To
Alex,
However, it sounds like rebuilding an index cannot require more
space that the database size itself, right?
Correct, in order to build the index, the engine must build and sort a
projection of the index values.
So, if you build an index on a string [say varchar(100)] column which is
