Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Possible Duplicate:
Performance difference between Primary Key and Unique Clustered Index in SQL Server
I make sure that I searched this forum but nobody asked this question before and I couldn’t find any answer in anywhere too.
My question is = “What’s the difference between a primary key and a clustered index?”
Well, for starters, one is a key, and the other one is an index.
In most database lingo, key is something that somehow identifies the data, with no explicit relation to the storage or performance of the data. And a primary key is a piece of data that uniquely identifies that data.
An index on the other hand is something that describes a (faster) way to access data. It does not (generally) concern itself with the integrity and meaning of the data, it’s just concerned with performance and storage. In SQL Server specifically, a clustered index is an index that dictates the physical order of storage of the rows. The things that it does are quite complex, but a useful approximation is that the rows are ordered by the value of the clustered index. This means that when you do not specify a order clause, the data is likely to be sorted by the value of the clustered index.
So, they are completely different things, that kinda-sorta compliment each other. That is why SQL Server, when you create a primary key via the designer, throws in a free clustered index along with it.