If it has zero or negative growth, why are you worried about the precise value of an autogrowth number? Pick a number (for example, 50 or 100MB) and move on.
I also think you may be spending a bit too much concern about autogrowth. While I agree that setting it way to small or way too big can be a bad thing, autogrowth of MDF/NDF files isn't a performance concern if you have "Instant File Initialization" enabled. If you're not allowed to have it enabled then, yeah, planned growth can be a winning move.
Autogrowth of LDF files is a whole 'nuther story because "Instant File Initialization" doesn't help there so much. Fortunately, they shouldn't need to grow often.
Setting both to some value in MB rather that % is definitely a winning move, though.
Shifting gears a bit, what you should really do is be very concerned about your "shrinking process". That's normally one of the worst things in the world you can do to a perfectly good MDF/NDF file and is a total waste of time for LDFs unless you first figure out what is causing undesirable log file growth and fixing it. Then, you only need to do a 1 time shrink.
is pronounced "ree-bar
" and is a "Modenism
" for R
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.
"Change is inevitable... change for the better is not".
"If "pre-optimization" is the root of all evil, then what does the resulting no optimization lead to?"
How to post code problems
How to Post Performance Problems
Create a Tally Function (fnTally)