Careful with VIEWs with SCHEMABINDING in Microsoft SQL Server
- Posted in
I was attempting to optimize an SQL process that was cleaning records from a big table. There are a multitude of ways of doing this, but the pattern that I had adopted for the last similar tasks were to delete rows in batches using the TOP (@rowCount) syntax. And it had all worked fine until then, but now my "optimization" increased the run time from 6 minutes to 2 hours! Humbled (or more like humiliated) I started to analyze what was going on.
First thing I did was to SET STATISTICS IO ON. Then I ran the cleaning task again. And lo and behold, there was a row reporting accessing an object that was not part of the query itself. What was going on? At first I thought that I was using a VIEW somewhere, one that I had thought was a table, but no, there was no reference to that object anywhere. But when I looked for that object is was a view!
The VIEW in question was a view with SCHEMABINDING, to which several indexes were then created. That explained it all. If you ever attempted to create an index on a view you probably got the error "Cannot create index on view, because the view is not schema bound" and then you investigated what that entailed (and probably gave up because of all the restrictions) but in that first moment when you thought "all I have to do is add WITH SCHEMABINDING and I can index my views!" it seemed like a good idea. It might even be a good idea for several scenarios, but what it also does is create a reverse dependency on the object you are using. Moreover, if you look more carefully at the Microsoft documentation it says: "The query optimizer may use indexed views to speed up the query execution. The view does not have to be referenced in the query for the optimizer to consider that view for a substitution." So you may find yourself querying a table and instead the engine queries a view instead!
You see, what happens is that every time when you delete 4900 rows from a table that is used by a view that has indexes on it is those indexes are being recreated, so not only your table is affected, but potentially everything that is being called in the view as well. If it's a complicated view that integrates data from multiple sources, it will be run after every batch delete and indexed. Again. And again. And again again. It also prohibits you from some operations, like TRUNCATE TABLE, where you get a funny message saying it's referenced by a view and that is why you can't truncate it. What?!
Now, I deleted the VIEW and ran the same code. It was faster, but it still took ages because finding the records to delete was a much longer operation than the deletion itself. This post is about this reverse dependency that an indexed view introduces.
So what is the solution? What if you have the view, you need the view and you also need it indexed? You can disable the indexes before your operation, then enable them again. I believe this will solve most issues, even if it's not a trivial operation. Just remember that in cleaning operations, you need some indexes to find the records to delete as well.
That's it. I hope it helps. Get out of here!
Be the first to post a comment