SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in

Fix the Little Things

By Steve Jones,

I thought this was a great blog post and it got me to read, even though it's a topic I know about, have written about, and didn't think the post would reveal anything amazing: Finding Fragmentation Of An Index And Fixing It. It's no-nonsense and it lets me know right away that this author intends to help me.

But I'm somewhat amazed how many fragmentation questions, posts, articles, and more that I still see on a regular basis. Shouldn't this be a low level feature of SQL Server that just works? In 2008, or I guess SQL 11 now, should there be any reason for a DBA to monitor this and write custom code to ensure that it's fixed on a regular basis? Should this not be something built into the system?

I dream about the day of right clicking a table and choosing "defragment." This wonderful built in utility would then return my table to it's initial fill factor and clean up all the allocations of extents to ensure that they were contiguous. It would have options I could pull up that would set the minimum and maximum levels of fragmentation I accept, based on server defaults of course, and it would ensure that my tables were kept within those limits. Sure it would be a background process, it would consume CPU cycles and require a good amount of disk space, but those things are relatively cheap.

Especially when compared with the cost of time for a DBA to manage this process. Even a few hours a year is too much time wasted by DBAs on a task like this.

It's not sexy, but there are a lot of DBAs out there that would really appreciate it. As much as I know large sales dominate the market and this isn't something that reps at Microsoft can point to, it's the little guys, those DBAs in lots of 1 and 2 person shops, 10 and 20 instance companies, that make the recommendation to upgrade. And if Microsoft spent some time cleaning up little features, making things work better, I bet there would be a lot of recommendations to change versions.

And, Microsoft, if you deliver small things that work well, along with the big, sexy features that flake or that we don't understand, you might be surprised how many of us would be looking to upgrade before Service Pack 1.

Steve Jones

Total article views: 143 | Views in the last 30 days: 1
Related Articles

Under Appreciated Features

This Friday we have a guest editorial from Andy Warren that asks about those features in SQL Serve t...


What Is the Hardest Feature to Learn About SQL Server?

SQL Server is a complex product and many of us work with only a small part of the product. However m...


SQL Server 2008 Features for SQL Server 2005

There are few good features in SSMS 2008 which would be good if included for 2005


What I Love About SQL Server

Well, there are many things I love about SQL Server. Otherwise, I wouldn’t spend my whole career aro...


Not Useless Features

There are some useless features in SQL Server, but Steve Jones wants to know which ones aren't and n...