not quite. With a full population every row is reindexed whether one of the
columns you are full text indexing has changed or not.
With an incremental population if the table you are full text indexing does
not have a timestamp column on it, every row is reindexed. If it does have a
time stamp column on it, only the rows which have changed will be reindexed,
even in a column which you are not full text indexing has been modified.
Note that with incremental populations each row is still retrieved, but may
not necessarily be reindexed. What you will find is that in many cases
incremental populations can take as long as or even longer than full
populations.
With change tracking however only the rows which you have modified the
contents of the columns you are full text indexing will be reindexed. It is
much faster than full or incremental for this reason.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com [quoted text, click to view] "Aaron" <Aaron@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:85BC5716-BC6D-421F-863C-EBD8D2452B2C@microsoft.com...
> Thank you very much for answers on a previous question. I have one more:
>
> The docs say if metadata is changed on a table, a full population will be
> done.
> Does this mean any metadata, even not related to the index columns? What
is
> really the scope of table changes that affect this? When will the
population
> occur?
>