4 ms·
That's a lot worse performance-wise than a clustered index that is at the same time the primary ordering for the table.
by polskibus 8y ago
That's a lot worse performance-wise than a clustered index that is at the same time the primary ordering for the table.
- adwf 8y agoTrue, but MSSQL style clustering has it's own performance trade-offs in terms of slower writes, fillfactor bloat etc.
- polskibus 8y agoIt's not going to be slower vs an unordered heap + a separate index that includes all the columns. Hence MS SQL implementation is superior. If you don't want a PK, then MS SQL offers you an undordered option.