General information
Forum:
Microsoft SQL Server
>>>>>If I read that right then my supposition was correct ? :
>>>>>"Additional columns should be ordered based on their level of distinctness, that is, from the most distinct to the least distinct."
>>>>
>>>>In other words, from the most selective (e.g. column with many unique values) to the less selective (column with less values). This is how I understand it and this is what I said.
>>>
>>>You said: "If you have many categories and just few sites, then using Category as first column "
>>
>>Right, this is how I understand the above sentence. Are you saying that my understanding is wrong?
>
>Seems so to me. In your example categories is the 'least distinct' but you advocate putting it before sites.....
If you allow me to nitpick: it is less the count of distinct values, but more the number of values excluded averaged across all values, which could be visualized as a kinda reverse distribution function. 100 possible values, 99 filled, but having a count of less than 3 and 199K on the last value is less selective as 15 distinct values with each grouped to a count between 10k and 20k ;-))
Previous
Next
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only