Fragmentation Level for HeapsIndex fragmentation increase as more row being deletedWhat happen when changing column type for a table with clustered index?Why index REBUILD does not reduce index fragmentatation with a page count > 1000?Different results rebuilding an index online and offlineDoes index rebuild time depend on the fragmentation level?Index rebuild - Not reducing fragmentationOnline & Offline Index RebuildMSSQL: High number of logical reads when inserting into fragmented heapNon-Unique Clustered Indexes AdministrationSQL Server hangs on index rebuild, works well after SQL service restart

Make a Bowl of Alphabet Soup

Overlapping circles covering polygon

Why can't the Brexit deadlock in the UK parliament be solved with a plurality vote?

What does "tick" mean in this sentence?

When is "ei" a diphthong?

Alignment of six matrices

Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?

Echo with obfuscation

Review your own paper in Mathematics

What (the heck) is a Super Worm Equinox Moon?

Isometric embedding of a genus g surface

Proving an identity involving cross products and coplanar vectors

How to make a list of partial sums using forEach

How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?

Why is the Sun approximated as a black body at ~ 5800 K?

How do I fix the group tension caused by my character stealing and possibly killing without provocation?

Does the Crossbow Expert feat's extra crossbow attack work with the reaction attack from a Hunter ranger's Giant Killer feature?

What is the meaning of the following sentence?

How to test the sharpness of a knife?

Why didn't Voldemort know what Grindelwald looked like?

Can I cause damage to electrical appliances by unplugging them when they are turned on?

The Digit Triangles

Limit max CPU usage SQL SERVER with WSRM

Deciphering cause of death?



Fragmentation Level for Heaps


Index fragmentation increase as more row being deletedWhat happen when changing column type for a table with clustered index?Why index REBUILD does not reduce index fragmentatation with a page count > 1000?Different results rebuilding an index online and offlineDoes index rebuild time depend on the fragmentation level?Index rebuild - Not reducing fragmentationOnline & Offline Index RebuildMSSQL: High number of logical reads when inserting into fragmented heapNon-Unique Clustered Indexes AdministrationSQL Server hangs on index rebuild, works well after SQL service restart













2















I am currently using scripts provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for executing maintenance job and of-late I have been noticing that there are many tables (heaps) fragmentation level is alarmingly high and needs to be looked and taken action upon. I checked FAQ at the site and seems his script doesn't support rebuilding heaps. I used below query to find the fragmentation level:



SELECT dbschemas.[name] as 'Schema', 
dbtables.[name] as 'Table',
dbindexes.[name] as 'Index',
indexstats.alloc_unit_type_desc,
indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent,
indexstats.page_count
FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) AS indexstats
INNER JOIN sys.tables dbtables on dbtables.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
INNER JOIN sys.schemas dbschemas on dbtables.[schema_id] = dbschemas.[schema_id]
INNER JOIN sys.indexes AS dbindexes ON dbindexes.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
AND indexstats.index_id = dbindexes.index_id
WHERE indexstats.database_id = DB_ID() and dbindexes.name is null
ORDER BY page_count desc, indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent desc


My application is supported by vendor and I have been communicating with them to change these heaps to tables and create clustered index however it hasn't yielded any meaningful result yet since they have defined primary key as unique non-clustered index and it is also part of foreign key, so needs to change at many level before doing any change. First of all, it took many days for me to explain the difference between clustered index and primary key with unique index.



I also went through the tweaks suggested by Mr. Brent Ozar for changing the defaults at script provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for index optimize in order to make it more efficient however I didn't find any details of heap rebuilding.



As per my understanding heap's fragmentation can be handled in two ways as described here:



  1. To create clustered index on table and drop it - This would clear all the fragmentation and also rebuild all non-clustered index however it would be time and I/O consuming.

  2. Rebuilding the heap - This would also clear the fragmentation and rebuild all non-clustered index part of table rebuild.

I can't go for option 1 because I am not aware of columns where clustered index can be created and also this could take longer than option 2.



I am looking for possibility of implementing option 1 in the scripts by Ola Hallengren or alternative method for handling this. Also to add, I would like to rebuild my heaps only when the size of heap is more than 10,000 pages and fragmentation level is more than 80.



I am using Microsoft SQL Server 2014 SP3 Enterprise Edition.



As a DBA - I don't prefer to have heaps in my database however since it is vendor supported application and since they have already defined primary key as unique index and these keys are foreign keys, its very difficult to change them to clustered due to references as well as likeliness of down time.



EDIT: I went through the link provided by Mr. Erik Darling and I can confirm that I have number of heaps with forwarded records or deletes across the databases. Now, I am back to point from where I had started i.e. with those two options. As I mentioned earlier, creating clustered index is very very difficult in my scenario and will require at least months(being optimistic) with likeliness of downtime considering complex foreign key structure. Need advise on rebuilding the heaps and possible side effect.










share|improve this question




























    2















    I am currently using scripts provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for executing maintenance job and of-late I have been noticing that there are many tables (heaps) fragmentation level is alarmingly high and needs to be looked and taken action upon. I checked FAQ at the site and seems his script doesn't support rebuilding heaps. I used below query to find the fragmentation level:



    SELECT dbschemas.[name] as 'Schema', 
    dbtables.[name] as 'Table',
    dbindexes.[name] as 'Index',
    indexstats.alloc_unit_type_desc,
    indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent,
    indexstats.page_count
    FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) AS indexstats
    INNER JOIN sys.tables dbtables on dbtables.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
    INNER JOIN sys.schemas dbschemas on dbtables.[schema_id] = dbschemas.[schema_id]
    INNER JOIN sys.indexes AS dbindexes ON dbindexes.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
    AND indexstats.index_id = dbindexes.index_id
    WHERE indexstats.database_id = DB_ID() and dbindexes.name is null
    ORDER BY page_count desc, indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent desc


    My application is supported by vendor and I have been communicating with them to change these heaps to tables and create clustered index however it hasn't yielded any meaningful result yet since they have defined primary key as unique non-clustered index and it is also part of foreign key, so needs to change at many level before doing any change. First of all, it took many days for me to explain the difference between clustered index and primary key with unique index.



    I also went through the tweaks suggested by Mr. Brent Ozar for changing the defaults at script provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for index optimize in order to make it more efficient however I didn't find any details of heap rebuilding.



    As per my understanding heap's fragmentation can be handled in two ways as described here:



    1. To create clustered index on table and drop it - This would clear all the fragmentation and also rebuild all non-clustered index however it would be time and I/O consuming.

    2. Rebuilding the heap - This would also clear the fragmentation and rebuild all non-clustered index part of table rebuild.

    I can't go for option 1 because I am not aware of columns where clustered index can be created and also this could take longer than option 2.



    I am looking for possibility of implementing option 1 in the scripts by Ola Hallengren or alternative method for handling this. Also to add, I would like to rebuild my heaps only when the size of heap is more than 10,000 pages and fragmentation level is more than 80.



    I am using Microsoft SQL Server 2014 SP3 Enterprise Edition.



    As a DBA - I don't prefer to have heaps in my database however since it is vendor supported application and since they have already defined primary key as unique index and these keys are foreign keys, its very difficult to change them to clustered due to references as well as likeliness of down time.



    EDIT: I went through the link provided by Mr. Erik Darling and I can confirm that I have number of heaps with forwarded records or deletes across the databases. Now, I am back to point from where I had started i.e. with those two options. As I mentioned earlier, creating clustered index is very very difficult in my scenario and will require at least months(being optimistic) with likeliness of downtime considering complex foreign key structure. Need advise on rebuilding the heaps and possible side effect.










    share|improve this question


























      2












      2








      2








      I am currently using scripts provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for executing maintenance job and of-late I have been noticing that there are many tables (heaps) fragmentation level is alarmingly high and needs to be looked and taken action upon. I checked FAQ at the site and seems his script doesn't support rebuilding heaps. I used below query to find the fragmentation level:



      SELECT dbschemas.[name] as 'Schema', 
      dbtables.[name] as 'Table',
      dbindexes.[name] as 'Index',
      indexstats.alloc_unit_type_desc,
      indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent,
      indexstats.page_count
      FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) AS indexstats
      INNER JOIN sys.tables dbtables on dbtables.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
      INNER JOIN sys.schemas dbschemas on dbtables.[schema_id] = dbschemas.[schema_id]
      INNER JOIN sys.indexes AS dbindexes ON dbindexes.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
      AND indexstats.index_id = dbindexes.index_id
      WHERE indexstats.database_id = DB_ID() and dbindexes.name is null
      ORDER BY page_count desc, indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent desc


      My application is supported by vendor and I have been communicating with them to change these heaps to tables and create clustered index however it hasn't yielded any meaningful result yet since they have defined primary key as unique non-clustered index and it is also part of foreign key, so needs to change at many level before doing any change. First of all, it took many days for me to explain the difference between clustered index and primary key with unique index.



      I also went through the tweaks suggested by Mr. Brent Ozar for changing the defaults at script provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for index optimize in order to make it more efficient however I didn't find any details of heap rebuilding.



      As per my understanding heap's fragmentation can be handled in two ways as described here:



      1. To create clustered index on table and drop it - This would clear all the fragmentation and also rebuild all non-clustered index however it would be time and I/O consuming.

      2. Rebuilding the heap - This would also clear the fragmentation and rebuild all non-clustered index part of table rebuild.

      I can't go for option 1 because I am not aware of columns where clustered index can be created and also this could take longer than option 2.



      I am looking for possibility of implementing option 1 in the scripts by Ola Hallengren or alternative method for handling this. Also to add, I would like to rebuild my heaps only when the size of heap is more than 10,000 pages and fragmentation level is more than 80.



      I am using Microsoft SQL Server 2014 SP3 Enterprise Edition.



      As a DBA - I don't prefer to have heaps in my database however since it is vendor supported application and since they have already defined primary key as unique index and these keys are foreign keys, its very difficult to change them to clustered due to references as well as likeliness of down time.



      EDIT: I went through the link provided by Mr. Erik Darling and I can confirm that I have number of heaps with forwarded records or deletes across the databases. Now, I am back to point from where I had started i.e. with those two options. As I mentioned earlier, creating clustered index is very very difficult in my scenario and will require at least months(being optimistic) with likeliness of downtime considering complex foreign key structure. Need advise on rebuilding the heaps and possible side effect.










      share|improve this question
















      I am currently using scripts provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for executing maintenance job and of-late I have been noticing that there are many tables (heaps) fragmentation level is alarmingly high and needs to be looked and taken action upon. I checked FAQ at the site and seems his script doesn't support rebuilding heaps. I used below query to find the fragmentation level:



      SELECT dbschemas.[name] as 'Schema', 
      dbtables.[name] as 'Table',
      dbindexes.[name] as 'Index',
      indexstats.alloc_unit_type_desc,
      indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent,
      indexstats.page_count
      FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) AS indexstats
      INNER JOIN sys.tables dbtables on dbtables.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
      INNER JOIN sys.schemas dbschemas on dbtables.[schema_id] = dbschemas.[schema_id]
      INNER JOIN sys.indexes AS dbindexes ON dbindexes.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
      AND indexstats.index_id = dbindexes.index_id
      WHERE indexstats.database_id = DB_ID() and dbindexes.name is null
      ORDER BY page_count desc, indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent desc


      My application is supported by vendor and I have been communicating with them to change these heaps to tables and create clustered index however it hasn't yielded any meaningful result yet since they have defined primary key as unique non-clustered index and it is also part of foreign key, so needs to change at many level before doing any change. First of all, it took many days for me to explain the difference between clustered index and primary key with unique index.



      I also went through the tweaks suggested by Mr. Brent Ozar for changing the defaults at script provided by Mr. Ola Hallengren for index optimize in order to make it more efficient however I didn't find any details of heap rebuilding.



      As per my understanding heap's fragmentation can be handled in two ways as described here:



      1. To create clustered index on table and drop it - This would clear all the fragmentation and also rebuild all non-clustered index however it would be time and I/O consuming.

      2. Rebuilding the heap - This would also clear the fragmentation and rebuild all non-clustered index part of table rebuild.

      I can't go for option 1 because I am not aware of columns where clustered index can be created and also this could take longer than option 2.



      I am looking for possibility of implementing option 1 in the scripts by Ola Hallengren or alternative method for handling this. Also to add, I would like to rebuild my heaps only when the size of heap is more than 10,000 pages and fragmentation level is more than 80.



      I am using Microsoft SQL Server 2014 SP3 Enterprise Edition.



      As a DBA - I don't prefer to have heaps in my database however since it is vendor supported application and since they have already defined primary key as unique index and these keys are foreign keys, its very difficult to change them to clustered due to references as well as likeliness of down time.



      EDIT: I went through the link provided by Mr. Erik Darling and I can confirm that I have number of heaps with forwarded records or deletes across the databases. Now, I am back to point from where I had started i.e. with those two options. As I mentioned earlier, creating clustered index is very very difficult in my scenario and will require at least months(being optimistic) with likeliness of downtime considering complex foreign key structure. Need advise on rebuilding the heaps and possible side effect.







      sql-server sql-server-2014 ola-hallengren fragmentation heap






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 days ago







      Learning_DBAdmin

















      asked Mar 17 at 9:17









      Learning_DBAdminLearning_DBAdmin

      19712




      19712




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          9














          Heaps have a few special challenges that you can't experience with clustered indexes:



          • Forwarded Records

          • Captive Pages

          I'd suggest running sp_BlitzIndex against your database to find out if either of these things is happening with your Heaps. If not, then leave them alone. If they are, you may need to consider rebuilding them.



          At this time, you can't reorganize a Heap table, and rebuilding a Heap table will also rebuild any nonclustered indexes on it. It may be cheaper to drop them, rebuild the Heap table, and then recreate the nonclustered indexes afterwards.



          You can read more about this stuff here:



          • sp_BlitzIndex Self Loathing Indexes

          • How To Fix Forwarded Records

          • Mysterious Forwarded Records

          • Forwarded Fetches and Bookmark Lookups





          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "182"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f232357%2ffragmentation-level-for-heaps%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            9














            Heaps have a few special challenges that you can't experience with clustered indexes:



            • Forwarded Records

            • Captive Pages

            I'd suggest running sp_BlitzIndex against your database to find out if either of these things is happening with your Heaps. If not, then leave them alone. If they are, you may need to consider rebuilding them.



            At this time, you can't reorganize a Heap table, and rebuilding a Heap table will also rebuild any nonclustered indexes on it. It may be cheaper to drop them, rebuild the Heap table, and then recreate the nonclustered indexes afterwards.



            You can read more about this stuff here:



            • sp_BlitzIndex Self Loathing Indexes

            • How To Fix Forwarded Records

            • Mysterious Forwarded Records

            • Forwarded Fetches and Bookmark Lookups





            share|improve this answer





























              9














              Heaps have a few special challenges that you can't experience with clustered indexes:



              • Forwarded Records

              • Captive Pages

              I'd suggest running sp_BlitzIndex against your database to find out if either of these things is happening with your Heaps. If not, then leave them alone. If they are, you may need to consider rebuilding them.



              At this time, you can't reorganize a Heap table, and rebuilding a Heap table will also rebuild any nonclustered indexes on it. It may be cheaper to drop them, rebuild the Heap table, and then recreate the nonclustered indexes afterwards.



              You can read more about this stuff here:



              • sp_BlitzIndex Self Loathing Indexes

              • How To Fix Forwarded Records

              • Mysterious Forwarded Records

              • Forwarded Fetches and Bookmark Lookups





              share|improve this answer



























                9












                9








                9







                Heaps have a few special challenges that you can't experience with clustered indexes:



                • Forwarded Records

                • Captive Pages

                I'd suggest running sp_BlitzIndex against your database to find out if either of these things is happening with your Heaps. If not, then leave them alone. If they are, you may need to consider rebuilding them.



                At this time, you can't reorganize a Heap table, and rebuilding a Heap table will also rebuild any nonclustered indexes on it. It may be cheaper to drop them, rebuild the Heap table, and then recreate the nonclustered indexes afterwards.



                You can read more about this stuff here:



                • sp_BlitzIndex Self Loathing Indexes

                • How To Fix Forwarded Records

                • Mysterious Forwarded Records

                • Forwarded Fetches and Bookmark Lookups





                share|improve this answer















                Heaps have a few special challenges that you can't experience with clustered indexes:



                • Forwarded Records

                • Captive Pages

                I'd suggest running sp_BlitzIndex against your database to find out if either of these things is happening with your Heaps. If not, then leave them alone. If they are, you may need to consider rebuilding them.



                At this time, you can't reorganize a Heap table, and rebuilding a Heap table will also rebuild any nonclustered indexes on it. It may be cheaper to drop them, rebuild the Heap table, and then recreate the nonclustered indexes afterwards.



                You can read more about this stuff here:



                • sp_BlitzIndex Self Loathing Indexes

                • How To Fix Forwarded Records

                • Mysterious Forwarded Records

                • Forwarded Fetches and Bookmark Lookups






                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited Mar 17 at 22:25









                Joe Obbish

                21.3k43187




                21.3k43187










                answered Mar 17 at 13:21









                Erik DarlingErik Darling

                21.6k1267108




                21.6k1267108



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f232357%2ffragmentation-level-for-heaps%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Identifying “long and narrow” polygons in with PostGISlength and width of polygonWhy postgis st_overlaps reports Qgis' “avoid intersections” generated polygon as overlapping with others?Adjusting polygons to boundary and filling holesDrawing polygons with fixed area?How to remove spikes in Polygons with PostGISDeleting sliver polygons after difference operation in QGIS?Snapping boundaries in PostGISSplit polygon into parts adding attributes based on underlying polygon in QGISSplitting overlap between polygons and assign to nearest polygon using PostGIS?Expanding polygons and clipping at midpoint?Removing Intersection of Buffers in Same Layers

                    Masuk log Menu navigasi

                    อาณาจักร (ชีววิทยา) ดูเพิ่ม อ้างอิง รายการเลือกการนำทาง10.1086/39456810.5962/bhl.title.447410.1126/science.163.3863.150576276010.1007/BF01796092408502"Phylogenetic structure of the prokaryotic domain: the primary kingdoms"10.1073/pnas.74.11.5088432104270744"Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya"1990PNAS...87.4576W10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576541592112744PubMedJump the queueexpand by handPubMedJump the queueexpand by handPubMedJump the queueexpand by hand"A revised six-kingdom system of life"10.1111/j.1469-185X.1998.tb00030.x9809012"Only six kingdoms of life"10.1098/rspb.2004.2705169172415306349"Kingdoms Protozoa and Chromista and the eozoan root of the eukaryotic tree"10.1098/rsbl.2009.0948288006020031978เพิ่มข้อมูล