Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
bjornh
Yak Posting Veteran
87 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-08-05 : 06:32:46
|
| I have a db with (in the future, i hope :D) lots of users and each user is using 15 tables, now what i want to know, does it matter, looking at the preformance, what option i use? (lots of tables or a few very big tables)thxBjorn |
|
|
KnooKie
Aged Yak Warrior
623 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-05 : 08:14:24
|
| Hard to say without seeing the structure. It is largely dependent on what type/size of recordsets are being accessed/opened by the users. How many rows are in the tables ?Generally large tables are best avoided. Bear in mind also the 8k row size limit for tables if you choose big.Paul |
 |
|
|
dsdeming
479 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-05 : 13:30:12
|
| I would start with a normalized database, and only consider denormalization or vertical partitioning if the performance of the normalized database was unacceptable. |
|
|
|
Page47
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2878 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-05 : 14:30:40
|
quote:
lots of users and each user is using 15 tables
Do you mean to imply that each users has her own set of tables? So your database will have N * 15 (where N is number of users) tables? If so, you (seriously) need to consider a normalized design.Jay White{0} |
|
|
|
bjornh
Yak Posting Veteran
87 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-05 : 18:35:51
|
quote:
quote:
lots of users and each user is using 15 tables
Do you mean to imply that each users has her own set of tables? So your database will have N * 15 (where N is number of users) tables? If so, you (seriously) need to consider a normalized design.Jay White{0}
OK, i'am first going back to some normalization articles and i already thought of a few changes that could help me... So, if i'll still have the probs later this week, you guys will hear more from me :Dthx and as we say in Holland:'Houdoe en bedankt heej..' :) |
|
|
|
bjornh
Yak Posting Veteran
87 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-06 : 04:14:27
|
| oke, After looking back at why i even created this db structure, I came with a anwser:When I created this db, it was on a Access database with every user his own database... And creating the db with 15 tables each, gave a better preformance than my first design wich was with only 2 tables.. so, when i made the change to SQL server, i just copyed the structure but I couldn't create a new db for each user because my hosting provider askes 7 euro/pm for every new db... And i all dumped it into 1 db... but now, after reviewing it, and some testing, I found out that the 2 table design workes just as well as the 15 table design.. there just one thing left to do, and that's changing the structureso everbody can have a nice sleep again because i think the problem is solved.grtzBjorn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lots of tables or a few very big tables?