<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Overhead in Non-Unique Clustered Indexes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/</link>
	<description>Adventures in SQL Tuning - a blog for the rest of us</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:21:02 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Undocumented Function in SQL 2008 : SQL Fool</title>
		<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/comment-page-1/#comment-4923</link>
		<dc:creator>Undocumented Function in SQL 2008 : SQL Fool</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlfool.com/?p=961#comment-4923</guid>
		<description>[...] by rolling up your sleeves and getting into the nitty-gritty of data pages (i.e. see my post on Overhead in Non-Unique Clustered Indexes). So imagine how happy I was when my co-worker Jeff shared an undocumented function with me today [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by rolling up your sleeves and getting into the nitty-gritty of data pages (i.e. see my post on Overhead in Non-Unique Clustered Indexes). So imagine how happy I was when my co-worker Jeff shared an undocumented function with me today [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Boek</title>
		<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/comment-page-1/#comment-3987</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Boek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 20:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlfool.com/?p=961#comment-3987</guid>
		<description>Great post. Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post. Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Log Buffer #147: a Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs &#124; Pythian Group Blog</title>
		<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/comment-page-1/#comment-3899</link>
		<dc:creator>Log Buffer #147: a Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs &#124; Pythian Group Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 16:54:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlfool.com/?p=961#comment-3899</guid>
		<description>[...] Ufford, the SQL Fool, covers overhead in non-unique clustered indexes, giving a walk-through of scenarios in which the DBA will encounter [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Ufford, the SQL Fool, covers overhead in non-unique clustered indexes, giving a walk-through of scenarios in which the DBA will encounter [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack Corbett</title>
		<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/comment-page-1/#comment-3898</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack Corbett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 16:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlfool.com/?p=961#comment-3898</guid>
		<description>Great post clearly explaining how clustered indexes work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post clearly explaining how clustered indexes work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Randal</title>
		<link>http://sqlfool.com/2009/05/overhead-i-non-unique-clustered-indexes/comment-page-1/#comment-3840</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Randal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 14:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sqlfool.com/?p=961#comment-3840</guid>
		<description>Hey Michelle,

Actually in the case where there&#039;s no duplicate in the non-unique clustered index, the UNIQUIFIER column is actually NULL, not 0 - otherwise it would have to take up space in the record. When I wrote DBCC PAGE, I decided to dump it out as a zero, to make more sense in the progression of UNIQUIFIER values when there are duplicates.

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Michelle,</p>
<p>Actually in the case where there&#8217;s no duplicate in the non-unique clustered index, the UNIQUIFIER column is actually NULL, not 0 &#8211; otherwise it would have to take up space in the record. When I wrote DBCC PAGE, I decided to dump it out as a zero, to make more sense in the progression of UNIQUIFIER values when there are duplicates.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
