database-fragmentation | 易学教程

SQL Server Fragmentation Problems

阅读更多关于 SQL Server Fragmentation Problems

问题 I have a couple of tables (User & UserRecord) in my database that get extremely fragmented (like 99%) and cause the whole database and therefore the website to grind to a halt. UserRecord is kind of like a snapshot of that user at a point in time. User is like the master record for that user. User has 0 to many UserRecords. User has around a million rows, UserRecord has around 2.5 million. These tables get written to a lot. They're also being searched a lot. They're both going to get a lot

SQL Server Fragmentation Problems

阅读更多关于 SQL Server Fragmentation Problems

Reduce SQL Server table fragmentation without adding/dropping a clustered index?

阅读更多关于 Reduce SQL Server table fragmentation without adding/dropping a clustered index?

问题 I have a large database (90GB data, 70GB indexes) that's been slowly growing for the past year, and the growth/changes has caused a large amount of internal fragmentation not only of the indexes, but of the tables themselves. It's easy to resolve the (large number of) very fragmented indexes - a REORGANIZE or REBUILD will take care of that, depending on how fragmented they are - but the only advice I can find on cleaning up actual table fragmentation is to add a clustered index to the table.

Reduce SQL Server table fragmentation without adding/dropping a clustered index?

阅读更多关于 Reduce SQL Server table fragmentation without adding/dropping a clustered index?

I have a large database (90GB data, 70GB indexes) that's been slowly growing for the past year, and the growth/changes has caused a large amount of internal fragmentation not only of the indexes, but of the tables themselves. It's easy to resolve the (large number of) very fragmented indexes - a REORGANIZE or REBUILD will take care of that, depending on how fragmented they are - but the only advice I can find on cleaning up actual table fragmentation is to add a clustered index to the table. I'd immediately drop it afterwards, as I don't want a clustered index on the table going forward, but