173 reputation
9
bio website
location Canada
age 39
visits member for 3 years, 1 month
seen Aug 21 at 11:58

Software developer, entrepreneur, passionate about what I do. Can be kind of random sometimes.


Sep
24
awarded  Autobiographer
Jul
22
awarded  Popular Question
Dec
12
awarded  Teacher
Dec
25
accepted SQL Server table appears locked for no reason
Dec
22
answered SQL Server table appears locked for no reason
Dec
22
comment SQL Server table appears locked for no reason
@billinkc Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I'll try it tomorrow.
Dec
22
comment SQL Server table appears locked for no reason
@JonSeigel Yes, I've been assuming a blocking issue as well; a little stumped cause nothing has changed, except for server patches.
Dec
21
asked SQL Server table appears locked for no reason
Jun
27
accepted Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Jun
27
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Appreciate your taking the time and your thoughts. Links were helpful as well - I immediately see a few tables where I don't need to be as concerned, given the activity on the tables, and a few others that I should absolutely add an Identity to.
Jun
26
awarded  Commentator
Jun
26
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
My use of Guids is related to the software design, not the database design. I'm using event sourcing for my write models, which requires uniquely identifiable instances across all aggregate types.
Jun
26
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Guids are being generated and assigned in software, not in the database. Changing keys to identities is not an option. I can add an identity field to the table, which would be ignored by the software, but I admit that feels like a waste to me - tho I wouldn't hesitate if the benefits are worthwhile.
Jun
26
revised Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Edited subject so it's actually sensible English.
Jun
26
awarded  Editor
Jun
26
awarded  Citizen Patrol
Jun
26
revised Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Update as per feedback provided on the original question, to provide a more concrete example
Jun
26
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
@JNK Not saying they don't have to consider a lot. But say I'm thinking through software architecture... I can talk for hours on the options and possibilities and why such-and-such is better in certain cases rather than this other option. I'm also able to boil it down to something that will ignore the finer points and considerations, and provide some suggestions based upon my years of experience. I was looking for the latter, not the former. But I'll be back.
Jun
26
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
Ok, I will, later. But I have to say I personally find the question reasonable as-is - I was hoping for guidelines. Clearly, experienced DBAs base their decisions upon a set of rules or a mental model they've built up over the years. As a software dev who only occasionally needs to dive deeply into databases, a general understanding is what I'm looking for, not a quick answer to a specific scenario.
Jun
26
comment Should a table have a clustered index even if it doesn't have appropriate fields for it?
The keys in my database are nearly all GUIDs, and (from what I've read and seen) it isn't a good idea to use them as clustered indexes. In some cases, the other fields are not at all static (as they will change regularly) or are not at all sequential (such as names or phone numbers). This is why I ask - whether it's best to define a clustered index anyhow.