Hi ,
Can u plz tell me what is fill factor and what its role in defining the indexes. It is by default 0% and can be set upto 100%, but what it makes difference if i change the percentage? Where it is exactly impacts? If u know any links then plz forward me.
Thanks And Regards,
Shailesh
Currently we have tables (in sql 6,5), many of them do not have primary keys.
While I was trying to re-index (re-org), many of them got an error:
"fillfactor 204 is not a valid percentage; fillfactor must be between 1 and 100."
(many tables' fillfactor exceed 100 or more...)
How can I fix them so I can upgrade to sql 7 ?
Thank you for your help.
I am really confused about this whole fill factor thing. The way I understand it, is if you have a table whose data remains pretty much static, you should use a higher fill factor. Suppose you had a database where you had at most 150 transactions a day that changed the data, should the fill factor be left at the default(0) or increased? How do you determine how much to increase it? Is there a rule of thumb that suggests if you have x number of changes against a table, you should have a fill factor between y and z percent?
Please Help
Chris
Hi all,
While creating indexes for a table, I specified a fill factor of 70%. I then inserted a few hundred rows into the table. Is it possible to check to what percent the pages are full after the rows have been inserted?
Thanks in advance,
Praveena
You have a db with 50,000 records and you want to add 100,000 more. What should the right fill factor be? Is there a way to "calculate" a fill factor if you don't want to use default? Any help is appreciated. Thank you.
View 3 Replies View RelatedIf fill factor is specified as 100 for a table what will be the impact of this?I want to know any updation or insertion will be possible or not?
View 3 Replies View RelatedHellow, everyone"
I have a web online table that is inserted about 1500 record one day. Each night, a DST is running to pull all data to anther database. How to set fill factor on a one column index to get the best performance? Current fill factor is 80%.
Thanks
ZYT
Hi experts, I would like to ask regarding FILL FACTOR. I observed that our system's loading is a bit slow, and some of the modules take 1 to 2 minutes loading. Maintenance activity is regularly executed based on the scheduled sets. Then I tried to checked the tables indexes/keys turns out that the FILL FACTOR is set to ZERO(0). I would like to know if the FILL FACTOR set to zero will be a factor for the system to slow down..????
Darren Bernabe Blanco
How do i find out how much fill facot has been spcified in given table?.
View 1 Replies View RelatedWhat are the criteria to decide the optimal(or close to optimal) fill factor?
Any input is appreciated.
You have 50,000 records in a database file and you know you want to add another 100,000 records in the next several weeks. What fill factor would you use to maximize performance?
A.0(default setting)
B.30
C.70
D.100
which one is correct? And how to calculate fill factor?
I have some non-clustered , non-unique indexes on a medium sized table (25,000 rows).
The fill factore is showing 248% on these indexes. I have tried setting the fill factor to various values 100% or less. The re build index seems to work, however the est min/avg/max size of the index all show appx 160Kb, whilst the actual size is in excess of 50Mb !!
We run a weekly rebuild of all indexes overnight, without any fill params and following this the fill on these indexes goes back to 248% !
I have also dropped and re-created the index with a fill of 100%, and it has still reverted to 248% following the weekly rebuild.
I have also looked at the server config, and the fill factor there shows a running value of 171% !!, although the current config is set to 0.
The server is stopped every evening, so no way should the config have a value of 171, especially since the max allowed value is 100.
Any advice/assistance would be gratefully received.
I know what fill factor is ... and know that I should set it high when I have static data tables (where the data rarely changes) and low when I expect to have page splits ...
but does anyone know what affect on performance this setting has ? I don't quite get what Books Online says about it.
Thanks
Carol
I am trying to set up the relationship (Primary Key and Forign Key) in several tables. I would like to find a way also be able to set 'Fill Factor = 90%' in the script. Here is the code that i have so far:
ALTER TABLE Req
ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Req_Bow FOREIGN KEY ( BowID )
REFERENCES Bow ( BowID )
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
J827
Hi there
Is there any such thing that you can find the current Fill Factor for each indexing? The only thing that you have an indication is by looking at DBCC SHOWCONTIF > Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 100.00% [0:0] and if this value is not reaching 100% means may have an issue with fill factor ?!!?
Also, how about SQL2000?
Thanks
HiThere are a lot of articles about the fillfactor.I did change the fill factor and that did not work as intended.How do I get back to the default fill factorI am using sp_msforeachtable undocumented database procedureand when the indexes are rebuilt the fill factor that shows upin origfillfactor is the one I am trying to move away fromYour help will be appreciatedVince
View 4 Replies View RelatedTurn away pure key zealots
I have a clustered index that starts with an INT IDENTITY(1,1) column and therefore you can only add data to the end of the cluster. What I'm confused about is the relationship between this and the fill factor. In a normal fill factor scenario you'd be worried about inserts causing page splits but if you can only append to this cluster does this mean I should set the factor to 100% even if I'm expecting a large number of inserts? Basically I don't understand what happens when you run out of space on a page on a B-tree if it's based upon an ever increasing number.
The tables in my database somehow are getting set with a fill factor of 90. In the properties of the server/Database Setting, the "Fixed" option is unchecked. Last Friday, I reset the each table to have a fill factor of zero, but when I came in today, the tables reset themselves to having a fill factor = 90. Any ideas of why this is happening and how I can stop this? Your help is greatly appreciated.
Mark
If I have a clustered index on only one column of the table, the column being the primary key and an identity column ( int datatype, Ascending CIDX), then can I go ahead and have the Fill Factor be 100%. I may add more rows at a later date to the table.
Let me know.
Hi,
Now i am doing a R&D on indexes in SQL 2005. I want to know clearly what is the actual uses of Fill Factor? What is advantage and disadvantage of it?
Where it should use this fill factor?
Please answer me as soon as possible.
Ganesh.
I am about to rebuild all my indexes on a database that is very heavily fragmented. In looking at the report, seems that 80% or more tables are 90%+ fragmented.
My understanding is that fill value value is used for performance reasons. Our shiny new backend SAN is 100% SSD. If solid state can provide a sub-millisecond response, is fill factor still necessary at the cost of additional space being used used?
Are there any rules of thumb to apply when entering the Index Fill Factor?
I just want to make sure I'm enter a optimal value.
Using MS SQL 2000.
Thanks!
--PhB
As the title says I re-indexed all of my databases using the wrong fill factor. Instead of using 90% as the fill factor I misunderstood and set this at 10%. So I believe my databases are now packed with a ton of unused space. The DB sizes should be about 5-6 GB but have since grown to 20-40GB. I am very new to SQL administration and don't know of a safe way to remove this unused space so that my databases return to their normal sizes. The databases do not grow very much at all so the free space is not really that necessary.
View 9 Replies View RelatedIs the "Fill Factor" percentage is same as the "change free space per page percentage to" option in the Rebuild Index task wizard?
OR Is it inverse of it ?
Any comments and suggestions are welcome.....
Jas
I'm working to improve performance on a database I've inherited, and there are several thousand indexes. I've got a list of ones which should definitely exist within the database, and I'm looking to strip out all the others and start fresh, though this list is still quite large (1000 or so).
Is there a way I can remove all the indexes that are not in my list without too much trouble? I.e. without having to manually go through them all individually. The list is currently in a csv file.
I'm looking to either automate the removal of indexes not in the list, or possibly to generate the Create statements for the indexes on the list and simply remove all indexes and then run these statements.
As an aside, when trying to list all indexes in the database, I've found various scripts to do this, but found they all seem to produce differing results. What is the best script to list all indexes?
How Index will help to optimize SP.
spatle
Is there a way to explicitly assign 'weights' or 'importance' factors to attributes and have that to be considered by the association rules and decision trees algorithms during training? I would like to do so without preprocessing the data (In any case, I can't think on a way to assign weight with preprocessing to boolean attributes like 'smoker')
thanks
I'm hoping someone will be able to point me in the right direction for solving this problem as i've come a bit stuck.
The Sql Server 2005 Stored Procedure runs in about 3 secs for a small table when run from SQL Management Studio (starting with dbcc freeproccache before execution) but times out when run through ADO.NET on .NET (45 sec timeout).
I've made sure the connection was closed prior to opening and executing the adapter. I'm a bit stuck as where to check next though.
Any ideas greatfully received, Thanks
Anybody knows how to apply an inflation factor depending on the date to a measure
The Inflation Factor is (Current Month Rate / X Month Rate)
So lets say for current year the rates are
Jan 121.64
Feb 121.98
March 122.244
April 122.171
For example
If I want to calculate for March I would show a column for January February and March, the column for January would be multiplied by (122.244/121.64) the column for February would be multiplied by (122.244/121.98) and march by one (122.244/122.244)
But in April the factors would be different I would have 4 columns, January February March and April, January amounts would be multiplied by (122.171/121.64) February by (122.171/121.98) March by (122.171/122.244) and April by one (122.171/122.171)
Im using SSAS 2005
Thanks in advance
Isaac
When sizing products we use predefined size groups that the users can choose any or all of the sizes from. For example if i size group consisted of sizes (6,8,10) they could use all sizes (6,8,10) or just (6,8) or just (10) if required. Similarly, if a group consisted of (S,M,L,XL) they could choose to only buy (S,L). They cannot choose across groups, so would not be able to choose (6,S)
Once the required sizing is determined they then assign size mixes to the sizes to denote how much of the buy will be in that size. So for example if we had 3 sizes: (6,8,10) and they had the associated mixes (25%,25%,50%) that would mean we would buy 25% of size 6 and 50% of size 10. All size mixes must add up to 100% in total.
The users do analysis to determine what sizes they wish to buy and how much of it.
We also have a franchise portion of the business that have some predefined size mixes. They use the same base size groups as above, but the rule is that they can only use sizes that the particular product is being bought in.
So if the assigned franchise mix is S (50%), M (50%) and the main mix was S (100%) then the franchise mix would only be able to then have the S size.
We would then eliminate the sizes from the franchise mix and then to ensure that the franchise mix still adds to 100 we would then pro-rate up the franchise mix to give a new mix. To do this I divide one by the total the remaining size mixes to get a ratio and then multiple the mixes by this factor.
In the case above not be able to use the M size and would only use the S.This would be
-Total of remaining mixes, in this case only size S for simplicity
1 / 0.5 = 2
-multiple original mix by this factor
0.5 * 2 = 1
size S would now be 100% instead of 50%
The issue I'm having is that on occasion some of the totals are adding up to 100.01% because another one of the requirements is that it needs to be 4 decimal places (0.1015 would represent 10.15% in excel)
Here is a shortened version of the code with some test data:
DECLARE @SizeRange TABLE
(
SizeProfileIDINTNOT NULL,
CPCVARCHAR(3)NOT NULL,
SizeNameVARCHAR(5)NOT NULL,
SizeMixDECIMAL(14,4)NOT NULL
[Code] ...
How to get this to round to 4dp and still total 100%?
So I'm reading http://www.sql-server-performance.com/tips/clustered_indexes_p2.aspx and I come across this:
When selecting a column to base your clustered index on, try to avoid columns that are frequently updated. Every time that a column used for a clustered index is modified, all of the non-clustered indexes must also be updated, creating additional overhead. [6.5, 7.0, 2000, 2005] Updated 3-5-2004
Does this mean if I have say a table called Item with a clustered index on a column in it called itemaddeddate, and several non-clustered indexes associated with that table, that if a record gets modified and it's itemaddeddate value changes, that ALL my indexes on that table will get rebuilt? Or is it referring to the table structure changing?
If so does this "pseudocode" example also cause this to occur:
sqlstring="select * from item where itemid=12345"
rs.open sqlstring, etc, etc, etc
rs.Fields("ItemName")="My New Item Name"
rs.Fields("ItemPrice")=1.00
rs.Update
Note I didn't explicitly change the value of rs.fields("ItemAddedDate")...does rs.Fields("ItemAddedDate")=rs.Fields("ItemAddedDate") occur implicitly, which would force the rebuild of all the non-clustered indexes?
I have a requirement to only rebuild the Clustered Indexes in the table ignoring the non clustered indexes as those are taken care of by the Clustered indexes.
In order to do that, I have taken the records based on the fragmentation %.
But unable to come up with a logic to only consider rebuilding the clustered indexes in the table.
create table #fragmentation
(
FragIndexId BigInt Identity(1,1),
--IDENTITY(int, 1, 1) AS FragIndexId,
DBNAME nvarchar(4000),
TableName nvarchar(4000),
[Code] ....
What is the difference please?
View 1 Replies View Related