<?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: Tuning your SQL Query – Generating a Proper Execution Plan.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/</link>
	<description>SQL Server Performance Tuning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 13:31:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Metin</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2510</link>
		<dc:creator>Metin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Satnam, you gave a good sample. But We should be very carefull by including columns inside creating a noncluster index. The disc space and the cost of Insert statements will be increase by the number of Indexes and the columns which have been included. It depence on the attitude of your Table. For those, which get lots of inserted data, it is not preffered to use. But in the other hand, which are mostly get read from many sessions, the performance will come to front and those cases we suggest to use...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Satnam, you gave a good sample. But We should be very carefull by including columns inside creating a noncluster index. The disc space and the cost of Insert statements will be increase by the number of Indexes and the columns which have been included. It depence on the attitude of your Table. For those, which get lots of inserted data, it is not preffered to use. But in the other hand, which are mostly get read from many sessions, the performance will come to front and those cases we suggest to use&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2460</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2460</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Satnam, is it okay to remove idx_city since it has already been included in the second index idx_key_student_first_name? You&#039;ve excluded student_id on idx_key_student_first_name but you didn&#039;t dropped idx_city.  Won&#039;t that be redundant? What are the pros and cons of having same column in one or more indexes?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Satnam, is it okay to remove idx_city since it has already been included in the second index idx_key_student_first_name? You&#8217;ve excluded student_id on idx_key_student_first_name but you didn&#8217;t dropped idx_city.  Won&#8217;t that be redundant? What are the pros and cons of having same column in one or more indexes?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prakash</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2454</link>
		<dc:creator>Prakash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2012 03:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2454</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are you keeping same column (city) in both indexes? or drop the 1st index (index idx_city)?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you keeping same column (city) in both indexes? or drop the 1st index (index idx_city)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ibra</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2450</link>
		<dc:creator>Ibra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very basic info...I guess this could be useful for inexperienced DBA&#039;s and Dev&#039;s...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very basic info&#8230;I guess this could be useful for inexperienced DBA&#8217;s and Dev&#8217;s&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Valentin</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2408</link>
		<dc:creator>Valentin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2012 23:39:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hardly any more basic than this...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hardly any more basic than this&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Facio</title>
		<link>http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2012/tuning-sql-query-execution-plan/#comment-2398</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Facio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?p=3327#comment-2398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Like it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
