Full text index not tracking changes on an indexed view

We had a peculiar situation today where our lovely indexed view
obviously had textual data in it but some recently added rows were not
being returned in a CONTAINS query when they should have been.
Deleting and recreating the FT index fixed things immediately and I
can't seem to reproduce it but it worries me for our live deployment
(due imminently!).
Has anyone else seen this? Is it reproducible (and fixable?!)
Mark
Hi Mark,
Do you have a timestamp column in underlaying table(s) ?
Have you activated automatic change tracking for your index ?
Jean-Pierre Riehl
http://blog.djeepy1.net
http://www.bewise.fr
<mbedser@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185555299.154393.224920@.d55g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
> We had a peculiar situation today where our lovely indexed view
> obviously had textual data in it but some recently added rows were not
> being returned in a CONTAINS query when they should have been.
> Deleting and recreating the FT index fixed things immediately and I
> can't seem to reproduce it but it worries me for our live deployment
> (due imminently!).
> Has anyone else seen this? Is it reproducible (and fixable?!)
> Mark
>
|||Change tracking does not require a timestamp column.
I think your problem will be solved if you do use change tracking (as the
previous poster points out).
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
"Jean-Pierre Riehl" <jean-pierre.riehl@.b-e-w-i-s-e.fr> wrote in message
news:1C0C02A3-0A2F-4294-97CA-59E453DE6780@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Mark,
> Do you have a timestamp column in underlaying table(s) ?
> Have you activated automatic change tracking for your index ?
> --
> Jean-Pierre Riehl
> http://blog.djeepy1.net
> http://www.bewise.fr
> <mbedser@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1185555299.154393.224920@.d55g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
>
|||I apologize for my mistake. Incremental update requires a timestamp column
whereas change tracking doesn't.
Jean-Pierre Riehl
http://blog.djeepy1.net
http://www.bewise.fr
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23CQlfIT0HHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Change tracking does not require a timestamp column.
> I think your problem will be solved if you do use change tracking (as the
> previous poster points out).
> --
> 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
> "Jean-Pierre Riehl" <jean-pierre.riehl@.b-e-w-i-s-e.fr> wrote in message
> news:1C0C02A3-0A2F-4294-97CA-59E453DE6780@.microsoft.com...
>