bcquality/community/knowledge/performance/choose-maintainsiftindex-by-read-write-ratio.md
Jesper Schulz-Wedde 9a4198eb28 Add [all] sentinel to bc-version; apply to version-agnostic knowledge
Most of the corpus — FindSet/SetLoadFields/CalcFields patterns, permission
sets, SingleInstance codeunits, DataClassification, IsolatedStorage,
transaction scope, SecretText — describes BC platform behaviour that is
identical across supported versions. The seed [26..28] range on every
file implied a version-specificity the content does not actually have,
and there was no way to express "applies to every version" in the
schema the way [w1] and [all] already do for countries and
application-area.

Extend the v1 schema with a universal sentinel for bc-version, parallel
to the sentinels already defined for the other dimensions:

  bc-version: [all]         # applies to every BC version

[all] is mutually exclusive with explicit versions. Range shorthand
([26..28]) and explicit lists ([26, 27, 28]) continue to work for files
genuinely tied to a version-gated API or deprecation.

Update read.md (field definition, matching semantics, partial-context
rule), write.md (default to [all], use ranges only with a concrete
reason), README.md (frontmatter example), and the CI validator. All
forty existing knowledge files and the three action skills convert to
[all]; none of the current content is version-gated. Validator passes.
2026-04-23 16:00:03 +02:00

26 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown

---
bc-version: [all]
domain: performance
keywords: [maintainsiftindex, sift, calcsums, flowfield, write-cost]
technologies: [al]
countries: [w1]
application-area: [all]
---
# Choose MaintainSIFTIndex by read-write ratio
> **Seed article.** Ported from BC Code Intelligence to seed the community corpus. Community contributors are invited to expand or refine.
## Description
`MaintainSIFTIndex` on a key decides whether the SIFT aggregate structure is updated on every `INSERT`, `MODIFY`, and `DELETE` that touches the key's fields. With `Yes`, `CalcSums` and FlowField reads are immediate — but every write pays the cost of updating the aggregate. With `No`, writes are cheaper but the first aggregate read after a change has to rebuild. Neither value is universally correct; the right choice depends on how often the aggregate is read versus how often the underlying rows are written.
## Best Practice
Measure read-to-write ratios for the key's SIFT fields under realistic workloads. Set `MaintainSIFTIndex = Yes` only on keys whose aggregates are read far more often than the rows are written (reporting keys on reference tables, dashboards). Set `No` on keys whose rows are written heavily and whose aggregates are read rarely (transactional ledger entries, import-staging tables).
See sample: `choose-maintainsiftindex-by-read-write-ratio.good.al`.
## Anti Pattern
Leaving `MaintainSIFTIndex = Yes` on every key by reflex or convenience. On write-heavy tables the cumulative cost turns every INSERT or MODIFY into several additional aggregate updates, and the impact compounds in batch imports and posting routines — often without any code-review signal that the property is the cause.