Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 12»»

Common Checks Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Thursday, January 23, 2014 8:32 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 11:24 AM
Points: 32,781, Visits: 14,942
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Common Checks






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1534327
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 1:55 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:49 PM
Points: 2,866, Visits: 1,708
Fragmentation
Fullness of files and prediction for when we will have to grow them. We don't want autogrowth in large production systems we like to plan it.
Absence of clustered indexes
Absence of indexes
System named constraints rather than explicitly named constraints. Not much point in having a schema compare tool unless you do this!
Identity ranges as per your editorial
Use of SQL reserved words in objects
Permissions granted to named individuals rather than AD Security groups
Direct access to objects rather than access via a role.
Job run time alerting. Why does something that should take 10 minutes suddenly take an hour.
Unusual data volumes (low or high) or growth beyond what was expected.


LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1534370
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 2:09 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, January 24, 2014 8:08 AM
Points: 1, Visits: 11
we monitor system activity
- users logging in
- data updates (people data feeds)
- changes to people structures
- emails sent from the system
- successful backups
- successful re-indexing of the database tables

Helps us to ensure the use and operation is within bounds and that the automated tasks are running.
Post #1534379
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 4:25 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 07, 2014 12:06 AM
Points: 3, Visits: 44
We monitor running time of reindex jobs and stop the job it goes over x hrs.
Post #1534429
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 5:49 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:23 AM
Points: 52, Visits: 354
"While we considered changing to a bigint, this was a third party product and they did not want to allow us to alter the schema."

There's your problem. Perhaps testing the product at expected volumes would have exposed this shortcoming. The company's refusal to adapt and correct an obvious flaw would automatically generate an RFP process in my world.
Post #1534448
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 6:41 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 21, 2014 8:53 AM
Points: 1, Visits: 50
Dev Environment:

When we get a database related bug, we consider whether we can write a check to catch that type of bug in the future. We go beyond the scope of the specific bug that was found.

Most of the checks were added years ago and we rarely get bugs in production related to careless design mistakes.

One example is a set of checks that were added to deal with bugs related to inconsistent schema or coding standards. For example, there is one that searches for fields with the same name in different tables with inconsistent data types. This also help us to find bugs with the same logical root that were not identified until the check was written.
Post #1534477
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 7:14 AM


SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 8:20 AM
Points: 4,862, Visits: 2,243
phegedusich (1/24/2014)
"While we considered changing to a bigint, this was a third party product and they did not want to allow us to alter the schema."

There's your problem. Perhaps testing the product at expected volumes would have exposed this shortcoming. The company's refusal to adapt and correct an obvious flaw would automatically generate an RFP process in my world.


Surely without knowing the background these sweeping statements are a little difficult to justify. How long had the software been in? What were the volumes (including projected ones) at the time of purchase? What alternatives, if any, existed at the time? What costs were involved in any proposed changes?


Gaz

-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
Post #1534484
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 7:25 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, March 14, 2014 3:22 PM
Points: 26, Visits: 44
One thing we do is we have a job the checks every hard drive on every server. It imports the bytes used on each drive along with total bytes available. We then have a SSRS report on our IT intranet site that displays that info if it gets to 30% free, turns yellow at 20% and red at 10%.
Post #1534487
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 9:53 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:44 PM
Points: 379, Visits: 907
phegedusich (1/24/2014)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"While we considered changing to a bigint, this was a third party product and they did not want to allow us to alter the schema."

There's your problem. Perhaps testing the product at expected volumes would have exposed this shortcoming. The company's refusal to adapt and correct an obvious flaw would automatically generate an RFP process in my world.


Surely without knowing the background these sweeping statements are a little difficult to justify. How long had the software been in? What were the volumes (including projected ones) at the time of purchase? What alternatives, if any, existed at the time? What costs were involved in any proposed changes?

-----------------------------------------

+1000 on that one Gary.
Post #1534573
Posted Friday, January 24, 2014 10:26 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 8:46 AM
Points: 845, Visits: 2,331
Untrusted, but enabled constraints (autofixed when possible)
Index fragmentation (autofixed)
Database owner not "sa"
Too many VLF's or too few MB per VLF
Autoshrink
Autoclose
Log files almost full
Data files almost full
Page verify other than CHECKSUM
Full recovery model databases without T-log backups
Any connection that's not encrypted


I'd like to add:
OS level fragmentation (but smart, using MB per fragment for DB files)
Excessive numbers of failed login attempts
Dynamic SQL ports
Backups not as current as required
Restores not as current as required, etc.
Sysadmin permissions other than "sa" and DBA's
Db_owner permissions other than "sa" and DBA's and a few third party accounts
Weak passwords
Service accounts with administrator access (local)
Service accounts with administrator access (domain)
Service accounts without standard group policy settings (Perform volume maintenance, etc.)
Default Fill Factor not recommended
Max memory too high
Cost Threshold for Parallelism too low
Antivirus not enabled
Antivirus not doing on-access scanning
Backup compression not on
Post #1534584
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse