On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, nathanelrick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Table1 > 74 fields > Total size of one row: 4302 bytes > > Table2 > 65 fields > Total size one row: 4786 bytes > > theses tables are link by a 1=1 relation. around 10 000 000 rows in each > table > > Is their any advantage to keep the data in 2 tables instead of one ? > i can eventually reduce the size on the row to make that it's can fit > inside a page of the database (8192) > Before you start to pare down the row width, store a few thousand rows into a combined table and run gstat. It will tell you how big the stored rows actually are - the run length compression may help you enough so that most rows fit on a page. When you're doing the consolidation, remember to include the record header (~14 bytes, +6 for a fragmented record), page header, and page index (4 byte per record). Why not use a 16K page? Good luck, Ann [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
