Is there a way to change the default faillfactor for a table or its nonclustered indexes without rebuilding it?Hi Jeffrey
Fillfactor only applies when an index is being built; it is not maintained.
So changing it on an existing index wouldn't mean anything. What are you
trying to accomplish?
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Jeffrey" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0B210F3F-F1E4-4857-A60C-41867F6EB1E8@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a way to change the default faillfactor for a table or its
nonclustered indexes without rebuilding it?
Showing posts with label indexes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label indexes. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Default fillfactor for indexes
Labels:
database,
default,
faillfactor,
fillfactor,
indexes,
microsoft,
mysql,
nonclustered,
oracle,
rebuilding,
server,
sql,
table
Saturday, February 25, 2012
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/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/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
>
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/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/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
>
Labels:
database,
deciding,
defragment,
defragmented,
defragmenting,
determine,
fragmentation,
index,
indexes,
microsoft,
monitoring,
mysql,
necessary,
oracle,
server,
sql
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
>
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
>
Labels:
asnecessary,
database,
deciding,
defragment,
defragmented,
defragmenting,
fragmentation,
index,
indexes,
microsoft,
monitoring,
mysql,
oracle,
server,
sql,
todetermine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)