Is it better to run maintenance sequentially or pralell

we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks such
as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
hours for some of the databases.
Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on all
databases or is it better to run them sequentially?
Hi
There is no issue with running them in parallel, but, can your disk
subsystem keep up? These taks are very IO intensive.
If they run in parallel, the sum of all the jobs might decrease, but each
individual job will take longer to complete.
Regards
Mike
"DBA72" wrote:

> we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks such
> as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
> hours for some of the databases.
> Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on all
> databases or is it better to run them sequentially?

Is it better to run maintenance sequentially or pralell

we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks such
as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
hours for some of the databases.
Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on all
databases or is it better to run them sequentially?Hi
There is no issue with running them in parallel, but, can your disk
subsystem keep up? These taks are very IO intensive.
If they run in parallel, the sum of all the jobs might decrease, but each
individual job will take longer to complete.
Regards
Mike
"DBA72" wrote:

> we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks su
ch
> as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
> hours for some of the databases.
> Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on a
ll
> databases or is it better to run them sequentially?

Is it better to run maintenance sequentially or pralell

we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks such
as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
hours for some of the databases.
Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on all
databases or is it better to run them sequentially?Hi
There is no issue with running them in parallel, but, can your disk
subsystem keep up? These taks are very IO intensive.
If they run in parallel, the sum of all the jobs might decrease, but each
individual job will take longer to complete.
Regards
Mike
"DBA72" wrote:
> we have a maintenance process which does various dbcc maintenance tasks such
> as dbreindex, indexdefrag and updateusage. This process can take over 4
> hours for some of the databases.
> Is there any drawback to running these maintenance processes parallel on all
> databases or is it better to run them sequentially?

Is DBCC DBReindex minimally logged operation?

Hi gurus,
Does anyone know whether DBCC DBReindex is a minimally logged operation or
fully logged operation?
Thanks,
Jeff" fully logged "
--
"Jeffrey Yao" wrote:

> Hi gurus,
> Does anyone know whether DBCC DBReindex is a minimally logged operation or
> fully logged operation?
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
>|||It is minimally logged when the database is in simple or bulk logged recover
y mode.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jeffrey Yao" <jxhyao1@.shaw.ca> wrote in message news:%235UKdhHqFHA.1556@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.g
bl...
> Hi gurus,
> Does anyone know whether DBCC DBReindex is a minimally logged operation or
> fully logged operation?
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>