I think that is the clearest blog title I used in years. Why do I mention this? Let me explain... Some time ago we stumbled over a performance issue in our applications. The root cause was a fragmented index, caused by the usage of a standard guid instead of a sequential guid. While looking for the right fix, I had to revisit one of my own posts: Sequential GUIDs with .NET 9 . In that post I mentioned that you can use Guid.CreateVersion7() to create a sequential guid. That is technically correct, but it is NOTa solution for SQL Server. Why does a random guid hurt? A clustered index in SQL Server is a sorted B-tree. When the key is random, every insert lands on a random page. If that page is full, SQL Server has to split it, which leaves you with half-empty pages, a fragmented index and more I/O. A sequential key always appends at the end, so pages fill up and stay put. Why is a version 7 guid not sequential for SQL Server? A UUID version 7 (RFC 9562) starts with a 48-bit U...