4 edited body
| link

Why would Indexed View perform much worse than equivalent table?

3 edited body
source | link

Using a NUMBERS table, I have proved the equivalence of the select above with that below, using a NUMBERS table, which is precise and deterministic and uses no sub-queries or APPLY operators, allowing it to be the definition of an Indexed View:

Note that the single clustered index on the view is identical to the (one and only) clustered primary keyindex on the original table.

Using a NUMBERS table, I have proved the equivalence of the select above with that below, which is precise and deterministic and uses no sub-queries or APPLY operators, allowing it to be the definition of an Indexed View:

Note that the single clustered index on the view is identical to the (one and only) clustered primary key on the original table.

I have proved the equivalence of the select above with that below, using a NUMBERS table, which is precise and deterministic and uses no sub-queries or APPLY operators, allowing it to be the definition of an Indexed View:

Note that the single clustered index on the view is identical to the (one and only) clustered index on the original table.

2 Tags
| link
1
source | link