DB Tuning Wizard

Hi All,
I'm using the SQL Server 2005 tuning wizard and its come back with a few
suggestions.
If I implement the suggestions it estimates a -1328% improvement. Now
does this mean things will be -1328% "better" or -1328% worse
-1328% doesn't sound much like something I'd want, but then why would it
suggest I do something that would be so much worse?
Also, it suggested creating statistics on various columns. Is that
something I should look at doing? I've never played with statistics
before, just the indexes...
Thanks
SimonSimon
What kind of suggestions? If it sugegsted creating an index or statitics and
you did that , so running the query again , have you noticed that it ran
faster?
I did some testing and followed the recommendations and saw that my
queries run much more fatser.
"Simon Harvey" <nothanks@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OQg5pVmWHHA.4668@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> I'm using the SQL Server 2005 tuning wizard and its come back with a few
> suggestions.
> If I implement the suggestions it estimates a -1328% improvement. Now does
> this mean things will be -1328% "better" or -1328% worse
> -1328% doesn't sound much like something I'd want, but then why would it
> suggest I do something that would be so much worse?
> Also, it suggested creating statistics on various columns. Is that
> something I should look at doing? I've never played with statistics
> before, just the indexes...
> Thanks
> Simon|||Well, it suggested dropping a few indexes and creating stats on a few
columns.
It's really just the fact that its put a "-" in front of the suggested
improvement (e.g. a "-1200% improvement".
I'd like to know if thats nowmal. I don't have time to benchmark all the
suggestions - the db's huge and I'm not getting paid to implement the
changes. I just wanted to see how the tuning wizard worked
Thanks
Simon|||> I'd like to know if thats nowmal. I don't have time to benchmark all the
> suggestions - the db's huge and I'm not getting paid to implement the
> changes. I just wanted to see how the tuning wizard worked
Well, I did not get "-" in front if the suggested improvment , so one thing
I know that DB TW in SQL Server 2005 is much more reliable rather than SQL
Server 2000
"Simon Harvey" <nothanks@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ebk3lsxWHHA.600@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Well, it suggested dropping a few indexes and creating stats on a few
> columns.
> It's really just the fact that its put a "-" in front of the suggested
> improvement (e.g. a "-1200% improvement".
> I'd like to know if thats nowmal. I don't have time to benchmark all the
> suggestions - the db's huge and I'm not getting paid to implement the
> changes. I just wanted to see how the tuning wizard worked
> Thanks
> Simon|||OK - Many thanks
Simon