Database Administrators Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for database professionals who wish to improve their database skills and learn from others in the community. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am using a SQL Server 2008 R2 DB with FTS enabled on it. I applied an FTS index on a table. The table is frequently updated (I mean the CUD operations). Keeping this in mind, I came up with a strategy for updating the above index:

  1. I run an update population of the index when any delete occurs on that table
  2. I run an update population of the index once an hour to track the newly inserted texts

I would be grateful for any constructive criticism of my ideas. Should any additional details be necessary, I will provide them.

Thanks in advance

share|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Any reasoning for not using Change Tracking-Based Population and letting SQL Server take care of the updates automagically?

Unless you are depending on WRITETEXT or UPDATETEXT to change LOB columns (which are not tracked), I'd suggest accepting the slight overhead associated with change tracking, enable automatic population (which is the default) and rest easy.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.