Sql-server – SQL Server 2008 R2 reindex job reorganise getting stuck

Defragmentation strategies help improve scan speed to/from disk.

The wide variety of opinions is because an environment's ideal defragmentation strategy should depends on many different factors. There are also multiple potential layers of fragmentation in play.

Saying that your databases are stored on a SAN isn't enough information. For example:

• Are database files stored on separate physical RAID groups or the same RAID group? What other processes are active on that same device? Are your backup files ending up there, too? You may have to ask your SAN admin for this information, because it's not always transparent.

• What are the access patterns for the databases? OLTP is generally random access, but sometimes an application is table-scan-happy and you can't change its behaviour (ISV app). Are the applications read-mostly, write-mostly, or somewhere in between?

• Are there performance SLAs in play during a recovery/failover period?

Brent's post assumes there is one giant pool of storage and everything shares it. This means the physical disks are rarely idle, and hence most access is random. If that is your situation, then the advice applies, and I agree with it for the most part. While this type of strategy is much easier to manage, it isn't necessarily (a) what you have in your environment, or (b) what is the best solution for your environment.

If index maintenance is burdensome, consider doing it less aggressively, and/or amortize the cost over the week (i.e., run light maintenance once/day, instead of heavy maintenance once/week).

You can also turn on the SortInTempdb option to potentially reduce the amount of logging that takes place in the user databases.

For a 1TB DB ... Is weekly rebuild overkill?

I found it hard to believe that your OLTP system goes over the course of a single week and reshuffles 1TB of data so bad as to require a rebuild. Very few use cases would ever call for something so dramatic. Unless you have an explanation why do you need such high frequency I will say no, one week is way way too often.

are the rule of thumbs for re-indexing frequency, % of database affected, # indexes that should be rebuilt

Yes, the same rule of thumb that applies to almost every performance related action: you measure impact. You establish a performance baseline, you measure the deviation from it over time, and you measure the impact of reindex actions. W/o basic measurements is always going to be a shot in the dark.

As for the original question: how do you reduce the amount of log generated during reindex? There are only two viable solutions:

• use minimally logged operations
• rebuild less, which require partitioning

As you write causes mirroring backlogs/delays it means option one is off the table as minimally logging and mirroring don't mix. That leaves only the option to rebuild less. Partition rebuild can come in handy, but only offline partition rebuild is supported. You can minimize the offline time by using fast partition switch (ie. you rebuild a copy of the data and then you switch the optimized rebuilt data).

Ultimately, for 1TB, you should never rebuild it. Your old data, which never changes, should lay at rest, compacted and archived. Current data is subject to churn and changes and you should only have to rebuild what has changed.