General information
Category:
Databases,Tables, Views, Indexing and SQL syntax
>>No. The RI code will not be touched.
>>
>>>
>>>ok, so i'll drop all tags and recreate all indexes with the help of a table containing all inforation abouts dbcs and tables. But what about the RI code? I'm using the RI code generated by VFP. Do I need to recreate RI code after a complete recreation of the indexes or I can eep using the old one (figuring that i won't change the relations in the DBCs)?
>>>
>>>Thanks one more time for your help,
>>>
>>>Alonso.
>
>OK, great!
>
>THanks, Craig & Tenea!
Hi Alonso,
I just made a 100,000 record table with 4 biggish indexes. Once created it was 3,419KB and its CDX was 2,859KB.
I then closed it, opened exclusive, and did a REINDEX. Its CDX size decreased to 2,015KB. Ignoring "bloat" for the moment, I think this makes sense because I purposely made 2 of the indexes content exactly backward (descended in value).
I then closed the table, opened it, and did 5 REINDEX commands in a row.
When I closed it the CDX was (still) 2,015KB.
I think it is fair to conclude that the REINDEX command, at least as of SP3, NO LONGER CAUSES CDX BLOAT.
So REINDEX just might be a simpler solution for you all around *IF* you are not doing this specifically to recover from a corruption problem.
Cheers,
JimN
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