title: Using more than one index per table is dangerous?
body: <p>In a former company I worked at, the rule of thumb was that a table should have no more than one index (allowing the odd exception, and certain parent-tables holding references to nearly all other tables and thus are updated very frequently).</p>
  
  <p>The idea being that often, indexes cost the same or more to uphold than they gain. Note that this question is different to <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1343344/indexed-view-vs-indexes-on-table">indexed-view-vs-indexes-on-table</a> as the motivation is not only reporting.</p>
  
  <p>Is this true? Is this index-purism worth it? </p>
  
  <p>In your career do you generally avoid using indexes?</p>
  
  <p>What are the general large-scale recommendations regarding indexes?</p>
  
  <p>Currently and at the last company we use SQL Server, so any product specific guidelines are welcome too.</p>