This account is temporarily suspended to cool down. The suspension period ends on Mar 28 '16 at 9:59.
Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 5 Rep.
Participate in meta
Badges
1 5 12
Newest
 Enlightened
Impact
~223k people reached

Apr
21
awarded  Enlightened
Apr
20
awarded  Nice Answer
Mar
28
answered Can mutli-threading java client cause high CPU utilization of SQL Server 2008?
Mar
28
comment how many database tables is too much?
Soy ou have a small database? My record so far was close to 4 digits - 98x IIRC. Not all data is trivial enough to fit in a dozen tables. You use as many tables as you need.
Mar
25
awarded  Custodian
Mar
25
reviewed Approve Table Design - User Management
Mar
25
comment Replicated databases across locations; delay in application
So you mean remote SQL statements that go to a low bandwidth high latency location take longer than local statements via high bandwith LAN with low single digit ms latency? Common sense, or? Especially "SQL Chatty" apps doing a lot of round trips will be hit significantly if you introduce latency into the network. Which you do when opening against a database in another location. Which also is totally not what you asked originally. Time for a new question then?
Mar
25
comment Replicated databases across locations; delay in application
So what is significant delay then? Merge replication is explicitly NOT designed to be real time.
Mar
25
comment Replicated databases across locations; delay in application
And quantify. What is "significant delay"? What relication approach are you using? SAN level replication is not really supported by SQL Server, you know.
Mar
24
comment Most efficient way to set up a database handling millions of links?
The reason to use separate tables because you ONLY have that few data makes no sense. One tagble is enough. And why habve the site name as string in every table? A separate "site" table and a foreign key would be proper. Host name and path in the host can be split.
Mar
18
comment Consolidating 2,000+ databases into a single database with up to 20,000 concurrent users
If you read his post he talks about seeing 20.000 concurrent users. Unless that software is written by someone really challenged it would run through application servers and that would really pool connections. No way 20.000 users connect directly to a database server while maintaining any decent archtiecture.
Mar
18
comment Consolidating 2,000+ databases into a single database with up to 20,000 concurrent users
500 inserts per second is pretty tiny today. I would say you easily will do that with - hm - somewhere between 32 and 64 connections ;)
Mar
18
comment Consolidating 2,000+ databases into a single database with up to 20,000 concurrent users
Irrelevant because unless the OP's application is totally ridiculous I doubt he will have more than 200 db connections top at the same time.
Mar
18
comment Consolidating 2,000+ databases into a single database with up to 20,000 concurrent users
You will NOT have 20.000 concurrent users - not even 2000. You will not even have 2000 concurrent connections unless your programmers are really bad. Because most of the time the users will look at their screen, not be active on the database. The db connection is only needed the moment a db interaction happens.
Mar
15
answered Table Design for Student Attendance hourly for each day
Mar
13
comment Is a 5+ column primary key bad for large (100 million+) table?
100 million is tiny by 2015 standards ;)
Mar
13
comment Is a 5+ column primary key bad for large (100 million+) table?
It is bad - as in: it should be avoided when possible. But for certain scenarios "bad" is very relative. In this case (have a same scenario here) it is the natural and best key, regardless of the small overhead it may have.
Mar
4
comment Restore databases from prod to test server with data over say X days in SQL Server 2005
Hard to say - especially given the tremendous extremely high price of a 2tb hard disc.
Mar
4
comment Restore databases from prod to test server with data over say X days in SQL Server 2005
Send them a link to the documentation what backup does. Backup/Restore do NOT filter data like this. And you should not do that on the backup side - backups are for backup. I.e. the backups should happen regularly, restores are another thing. But as a full backup breaks incremental backup chains.... you do not want to do them outside a workflow.
Feb
27
comment Does my database design work? Newbie!
Yes. Note that NPC is Non Player CHARACTER - so you can say a NPC is a character with... no player ;) This will make a lot of things easier - also down the road with logic. You POSSIBLY could do the same with location and container.