Deciding which indexes to defragment

I want to start monitoring index fragmentation and defragmenting as
necessary. My indexes have never been defragmented so I am trying to
determine which ones I should start with. I've run DBCC SHOWCONTIG and
saved the results to a table. What criteria should I use to determine
which indexes most need defragmenting? Logical fragmentation? Extent
fragmentation? Table size?
BOL states that, "Logical Scan Fragmentation and, to a lesser extent,
Extent Scan Fragmentation values give the best indication of a table's
fragmentation level." So should I sort by highest logical scan
fragmentation first? And how should the size of the table affect my
decision? For example, I'm thinking it would be more useful to
defragment a table with 100 million rows and 30% fragmentation that a
table with 1 million rows and 50% fragmentation. Does that make sense?
ThanksHi
This is the place to start:
Microsoft QL Server 2000 Index Defragmentation Best Practices
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...n/ss2kidbp.mspx
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.solidqualitylearning.com
<pshroads@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148424473.457642.7510@.i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I want to start monitoring index fragmentation and defragmenting as
> necessary. My indexes have never been defragmented so I am trying to
> determine which ones I should start with. I've run DBCC SHOWCONTIG and
> saved the results to a table. What criteria should I use to determine
> which indexes most need defragmenting? Logical fragmentation? Extent
> fragmentation? Table size?
> BOL states that, "Logical Scan Fragmentation and, to a lesser extent,
> Extent Scan Fragmentation values give the best indication of a table's
> fragmentation level." So should I sort by highest logical scan
> fragmentation first? And how should the size of the table affect my
> decision? For example, I'm thinking it would be more useful to
> defragment a table with 100 million rows and 30% fragmentation that a
> table with 1 million rows and 50% fragmentation. Does that make sense?
> Thanks
>