SQL Server 2014 :: Error - Cannot Create More Than One Clustered Index On Table
Aug 18, 2015
i have created a fact table which has unique cluster index as below,
CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX [FactSales_SalesID] ON [dbo].[FactSales] (salesid ASC)
WITH (DATA_COMPRESSION = PAGE)
GO
however later when i add CLUSTERED COLUMNSTORE INDEXES :
CREATE CLUSTERED COLUMNSTORE INDEX CSI_FactSales
ON dbo.FactSales WITH (DATA_COMPRESSION = COLUMNSTORE)
GO
it prompts error.
Msg 35372, Level 16, State 3, Line 167 You cannot create more than one clustered index on table 'dbo.FactSales'. Consider creating a new clustered index using 'with (drop_existing = on)' option.
I 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,
Hi all as i remember i had read in Books Online that on each Table in Sql Server we can create only one Clustered index but today suddenly i create another clustered index on a table without any Error from SQl server !!! BUT my query Order changed to the order of this newly created index. could anyone elaborate on this issue?
I need to create a Clustered Index (CI) on a very large SQL Server 2012 database table. This table has about approximately 10 billion rows, 500 GB in size. The job ran for about 20 hours into it and then fails with error: "Out of disk space in tempdb". My tempDB size is 1.8TB, but yet it's still not enough.
Here is my script:
CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX CI_IndexName ON TableName(Column1,Column2) WITH (MAXDOP= 4, ONLINE=ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB = ON, DATA_COMPRESSION=PAGE) ON sh_WeekDT(Day_DT) GO
I would like to put a Clustered Index on a date column in a current heap, but one question/concern.This heap every month has thousands of rows deleted and even more added later. How much of an issue will this cause the Clustered Index as far as page splits? I was thinking Fill Factor of 70%.I would normally just test and still will on Dev box, but my Dev box is much smaller than production as far as power.
I am trying to use an indexed view to allow for aggregations to be generated more quickly in my test data warehouse. The Fact Table I am creating the indexed view on is a partitioned clustered columnstore index.
I have created a view with the following code:
ALTER view dbo.FactView with schemabinding as select local_date_key, meter_key, unit_key, read_type_key, sum(isnull(read_value,0)) as [s_read_value], sum(isnull(cost,0)) as [s_cost] , sum(isnull(easy_target_value,0)) as [s_easy_target_value], sum(isnull(hard_target_value,0)) as [s_hard_target_value] , sum(isnull(read_value,0)) as [a_read_value], sum(isnull(temperature,0)) as [a_temp], sum(isnull(co2,0)) as [s_co2] , sum(isnull(easy_target_co2,0)) as [s_easy_target_co2] , sum(isnull(hard_target_co2,0)) as [s_hard_target_co2], sum(isnull(temp1,0)) as [a_temp1], sum(isnull(temp2,0)) as [a_temp2] , sum(isnull(volume,0)) as [s_volume], count_big(*) as [freq] from dbo.FactConsumptionPart group by local_date_key, read_type_key, meter_key, unit_key
I then created an index on the view as follows:
create unique clustered index IDX_FV on factview (local_date_key, read_type_key, meter_key, unit_key)
I then followed this up by running some large calculations that required use of the aggregation functionality on the main fact table, grouping by the clustered index columns and only returning averages and sums that are available in the view, but it still uses the underlying table to perform the aggregations, rather than the view I have created. Running an equivalent query on the view, then it takes 75% less time to query the indexed view directly, to using the fact table. I think the expected behaviour was that in SQL Server Enterprise or Developer edition (I am using developer edition), then the fact table should have used the indexed view. what I might be missing, for the query not to be using the indexed view?
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 have a view named select id,name,state from customer where state ='va' can I create clustered index on a view (name) if so please provide me with the sql statement. Thanks Al
I need to know how long it will take to create a non-clustered index given:I know how many columns the index will affect, the column width in bytes, how many rows, an average row size, the number of hard disks, their speed in RPM, and they are setup in RAID 5. Thanks
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 have created NONCLUSTERED index on table but my report is taking more time that's why i created columnstore NONCLUSTERED index on the same table but i have one query, if any table have row and column level index(same columns in index) . Which index query will consider.
hi all , I am using sql server 2005. I want to create non clustered index speed up the query search. but when i create index with this code CREATE UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED INDEX TEST ON DOCTOR_MASTER( DR_CUST_DOCTORCODE)
i am getting error like Column 'DR_CUST_DOCTORCODE' in table 'DOCTOR_MASTER' cannot be used in an index or statistics or as a partition key because it is non-deterministic.
This column is formulated column whose value is populated when record get inserted through function. It values is i format identity column value + category
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 ??
By default, the Upsizing Wizard transfers all indexes as nonclustered indexes. You can modify the Upsizing Wizard to transfer the primary key index to a clustered index. To make this change, start Microsoft Access and open the upsizing wizard library database. For Microsoft Access 95, the filename is Wzcs.mda. For Microsoft Access 97, the filename is Wzcs97.mda. When the database is open, click the Modules tab and open the UT_ModUserConstants module. Search down to the UT_CLUSTERED constant. Change the default value from False to True.
<<< end quote Question: I am using ACCESS 2002 upsize wizard, I searched my computer for *.mda and could not find any wzcs*.mda. How do I set it so that it creates clustered-index instead of non-clustered-index?
I have an issue where I am getting an error on an unique index.
I know why I am getting the error but not sure how to get around it.
The query does a check on whether a unique value exists in the Insert/Select. If I run it one record at a time (SELECT TOP 1...) it works fine and just won't update it if the record exists.
But if I do it in a batch, I get the error. I assume this is because it does the checking on the file before records are written out and then writes out the records one at a time from a temporary table.
It thinks all the records are unique because it compares the records one at a time to the original table (where there would be no duplicates). But it doesn't check the records against each other. Then when it actually writes out the record, the duplicate is there.
How do I do a batch where the Insert/Select would write out the records without the duplicates as it does when I do it one record at a time.
I already posted this over on sqlteam so don't peek there if you haven't seen that post yet. :)
So now to the question:
Anyone care to guess how long it took me to build a clustered index on a table with 900 million rows? This is the largest amount of data in a single table I have had to work with thus far in my career! It's sorta fun to work with such large datasets. :)
Some details:
1. running sql 2005 on a dual proc 32bit server, 8gb ram, hyperthreaded, 3ghz clock. disk is a decent SAN, not sure of the specs though.
2. ddl for table:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[fld]( [id] [bigint] NOT NULL, [id2] [tinyint] NOT NULL, [extid] [bigint] NOT NULL, [dd] [bit] NOT NULL, [mp] [tinyint] NOT NULL, [ss] [tinyint] NOT NULL, [cc] [datetime] NOT NULL, [ff] [tinyint] NOT NULL, [mm] [smallint] NOT NULL, [ds] [smallint] NOT NULL )
3. ddl for index (this is the only index on the table):
CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [CIfld] ON [dbo].[fld] ( extid asc )WITH (FILLFACTOR=100, SORT_IN_TEMPDB = OFF, DROP_EXISTING = OFF, ONLINE = OFF)
4. extid column was not sorted to begin with. ordering was completely random.
Note that I have changed the column names, etc, to protect the innocent. I can't go into details about what it's for or I'd be violating NDA type stuff.
We are trying to load flat text files with upwards of 7 million records into a table on SQL. The table has a clustered index on 3 fields. We setup the indexes prior to importing the data. We are sometimes able to complete smaller tables (500,000-750,000 records), however when we try the larger tables an error occurs :
Error at Destination for row number 6785496. Errors encountered so far in this task: 1
Location: somerge.c:1573 Expression: mrP->mrStatus!=MERGERUN::NONE SPID: 11 Process ID: 173
The destination row number is the same number as the total number of rows that we are trying to load.
None of the recods end up importing. The row number it gives is always the total number of records that was in the text file I was trying to import. I tried to import the text files first and then build the clustered indexes but a table with only 300,000 records ran for nearly 4 days without completing before we killed it. Be for we try to load the file we always delete whatever is there. Some of the files that we try to load are new and we have to set up the indexes from scratch. We are using a DTS wizard. Someone told me to find a way to get it to commit every 1000 or so but I can't find a way to do it. I looked and looked but can't find it !!!
I have a table "Client" that has two columns: "ClientID" and "ProductID". I created on clustered index on ClientID and when I opened the table in the management studio, I saw the table was in the order of ClientID.
Then I added another non-clustered index on ProductID. When I open the table again, it is in the order of ProductID. Shouldn't the table always be in the order of clustered index? Non-clustered index should be a structure outside of the table itself? Did I do anything wrong?
I was trying to create temporal table feature which gets introduced in SQL Server 2016 but I am getting this error while trying to create it; Cannot enable compression for object 'Department_History'. Only SQL Server Enterprise Edition supports compression
I have installed SQL Server CTP 2.0 on my system. Microsoft SQL Server 2016 (CTP2.0) - 13.0.200.172 (Intel X86) May 21 2015 11:16:44 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation Express Edition on Windows NT 6.2 <X86> (Build 9200: )
I am trying to create a temp table with a non-clustered index.
Originally I tried to create the index after I created the table.
This seemed to work fine, so I added my stored procedure to our Production environment.
However, when two users called the stored procedure at once I got the following error:
There is already an object named 'IX_tmpTableName' in the database. Could not create constraint. See previous errors.
I then found that SQL Server does generate unique names for the temp table but not all the objects associated with the temp table if they are explicitly named.
This is easy enough to solve for a PRIMAY KEY or UNIQUE constraint because the do not have to be named.
Is there a way to create an non-clustered index on a temp table without naming it?
My environment is SQL 2000. I have a table with 500 million rows. The table is consistently getting updated and inserted. I can not take the table offline. My clustered index needs to be rebuilt due to decreased performance. How do I accomplish this?
I have a table with clustered index on that. I have only 5 columns in that table. Execution plan is showing that Index scan occurred. What are the cause of the Index scan how can we change that to index seek?
I am giving that kind of similar query below
SELECT @ProductID= ProductID FROM Product WITH (NOLOCK) WHERE SalesID= '@salesId' and Product = 'Clothes '
I have three sprocs and three tables. I was told to use a clustered index in the first table and a unique clustered index on the second table. I never asked about the third table and the person I need to ask is on vacation. Most of the contents of the first table will be joined with all of the contents of the second table into the third table. Do I need to have a unique clustered index on the third table too?
The clustered index in the first sproc is on a unique key that I had created using by concatenating several columns together.
CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX IX_UNIQUE_KEY ON MRP.Margin_Optimization_Data (UNIQUE_KEY); CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_DATE ON MRP.Margin_Optimization_Data (PERIOD); CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_ODS_ID ON MRP.Margin_Optimization_Data (GL_SEG1_COMPANY_ODS_ID, GL_SEG2_PROFIT_CTR_ODS_ID, GL_SEG3_LOB_ODS_ID, GL_SEG4_PRODUCT_DEPT_ODS_ID, GL_SEG5_ACCOUNT_ODS_ID);
The second sproc with the unique clustered index is on the unique key from the first table and a date attribute.
CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX IX_UNIQUE_KEY ON MRP.[MGN_OPT_KPI_SOURCE] (UNIQUE_KEY, PERIOD);
In the third sproc, I'll have a nonclusted index on the ODS_ID attributes, but I'm unsure of how to go about the clustered index situation.
CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX IX_ODS_ID ON MRP.MGN_OPT_KPI_VALUES (GL_SEG1_COMPANY_ODS_ID, GL_SEG2_PROFIT_CTR_ODS_ID, GL_SEG3_LOB_ODS_ID, GL_SEG4_PRODUCT_DEPT_ODS_ID, GL_SEG5_ACCOUNT_ODS_ID);
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.
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 was under impression that rebuilding index online largely means that the index will remain available for use during rebuild and my procs and query will be able to use it during rebuild. Also my understanding was that table will be locked very briefly while the schema change will be completing.But when I was rebuilding the clustered index online on a large table with some 3 million records, the table got locked and I was not able even to read the data from it for some 5 minutes. Then I cancelled the operation as it was production server and it was one of our main transaction table.
Is rebuilding index online supposed to work this way? The table has no other index.The parameteres I used are:
REBUILD WITH (PAD_INDEX = ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB = ON, ONLINE = ON, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON, FILLFACTOR = 95)
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?
