Skip to main content

SQL Server–Does a ‘LIKE’ query benefits from having an index?

Last week I was interviewing a possible new colleague for our team. During the conversation we were talking about database optimization techniques and of course indexing was one of the items on the list. While discussing this topic, the candidate made the following statement:

An index doesn’t help when using a LIKE statement in your query.

This was not in line with my idea. But he was so convinced that I decided to doublecheck. Hence this blog post…

Does a ‘LIKE’ query benefits from having an index?

Short answer: YES!

The somewhat longer answer: Yes, a LIKE statement can benefit from an index in SQL Server, but its effectiveness depends on how the LIKE pattern is constructed.

Let’s explain this with a small example.

We created a Products table and an index on the ProductName column.

Let’s now try multiple LIKE statement variations:

Suffix Wildcard (Efficient Index Usage)

This query will benefit from the index because the wildcard is at the end:

Prefix Wildcard (Inefficient Index Usage)

This query will not benefit effectively from the index because the wildcard is at the beginning:

SQL Server has to scan all rows to find any products that end with "Pro".

Infix Wildcard (Partial Index Usage)

This query may partially benefit from the index depending on the database engine's optimization:

SQL Server can use the index to find rows starting with "Lap" but needs to scan those rows to find the ones that also match "op" at the end.

No Wildcard (Full Index Usage)

This query will fully benefit from the index as it effectively performs an equality check:

SQL Server uses the index just like it would for a direct equality (=) condition.

More information

https://use-the-index-luke.com/sql/where-clause/searching-for-ranges/like-performance-tuning

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...

A complex system designed from scratch never works

A few years ago, I worked as an architect on a big mainframe rewrite. I still count it as one of my failures. Not because the technology was wrong, but because I couldn't convince the management team to simplify the approach. Years later, the organization is still struggling to get the new system up and running. I left the project at the time, because I couldn't put my name behind an approach that would take very long and cost a lot of money without a working system to show for it along the way. Gall’s Law That memory keeps coming back to me, because it's a textbook case of Gall's Law playing out in real life. Gall's Law , from John Gall's Systemantics , states it plainly: A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works, and it cannot be patched to make it work. You have to start over with a simple system that works. What does that mean in practice,...