All geek questions in one place

SQL Server 2012: performance column index versus B-tree

One of the advantages of the columnstore index is that the data of one column is stored “next to each other on disk”. This means better compression and faster read times.

Nonetheless; when using a B-tree (regular non-clustered index) are the leaves of this tree not the data itself? Therefore, when I make an index in column A, will all the fields of column A be displayed on the disk parallel to the table? This means that data can be compressed and can be read quickly.

In short: when exactly is columnstore-index more efficient than a B-tree in one column?

Thanks in advance!

+4
source share
1 answer

So when I do an index in column A, aren't all the fields in column A displayed on disk in parallel with the table?

Yes, column A will be sorted. But all other columns will not. The column store index stores all columns in sorted order (in pieces of 2 ^ 20 rows).

+1
source

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1403926/

More articles:


All Articles