Posted by Russ Rose on 12/21/06 02:53

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in message
news:pu2ih.1080$yx6.204@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Russ Rose" <russrose@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Qaidna78puaMDxXYnZ2dnUVZ_ompnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in
>> message news:O6Rhh.914$yx6.162@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> "Russ Rose" <russrose@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rIKdnRRxk8OS2BrYnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> SQL has one data structure, tables.
>>>>
>>>> And indexes are what exactly?
>>>
>>> An index, not a data structure.
>>
>> You are saying it neither has structure nor data?
>
> I'm saying it's not a datastructure.

Is it different stating as one word?

It has structure, defines structure, and contains data. Just like a table.

>
>>
>> What value would a "covering" index be if that were true?
>
> Again, an index doesn't guarantee the logically returned order.
>
> First of all ask youself, what does order mean? Is it the Primary Key?
> Your covering index? Or something else?
>
> What if you have an IDENTITY column and a Primary Key, which is the
> correct "order".

The physical order of the rows is maintained by the clustered index. Without
that it is an unordered "heap" table, which is what you seem intent on
describing all tables as.

Interesting, yet pointless discussion. Going on vacation. Hope you all have
a great holiday!

[Back to original message]