Greg,

I think it is probably best to think along the same lines as Practix.
Arguably, that design is OK in the respect we are talking about MSDE.

Ie: Completed, Temporary, and Reference data. 

To read your mind and assume where you are going with this, We could
have another database potentially, for each year that contains completed
data being archived. This could reduce the size of the "Completed"
database, so that it's size is managed over the years. A strategy such
as this could extend the life of an application using MSDE or SQL 2005
Express. But I think most vendors set out to build a TreeHouse Greg, and
they keep adding on little extensions over time as the Government and
the GP's request things. Effectively giving us a patched up package that
is very shaky, and dangerous, as this thread originally started out
suggesting. Not many, and I have only found 1 at the moment as I haven't
looked at all of them, started out building a warehouse with the
flexibility to grow with the needs of a changing environment such as
health. That product is Profile from Intrahealth. Technically, that
product is a standout to any of the others I have seen todate.

Your last couple of Questions, I'll respond by saying the application
will manage the "Linking" of related data, between the tables in the
different databases such as UR number as an identifier. They simply use
a fully qualified Name to address data between different databases.
Ie:linked_server.catalog.schema.object which means
<ServerName>.<Database>.<Owner>.<Object>

Merging them into 1 database ???? Again, the software vendor would have
to have the forthought to build that into their applications.
SQL server along with other highend Database Engines have the ability to
spread "data", across different disks and so on, but I think the answer
you're after Greg is can you manage that sort of management ??.  No we
can't. The Vendors would need to have the management tools written to do
that usually.

Regards
Barry



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Twyford
Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2006 12:34 PM
To: General Practice Computing Group Talk
Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] File repair utility in MD2

Barry Lollo wrote:
> Greg,
> 
> Practix might be a good example for you to look at then.
> 
> They use the Default Instance (1 SQL server), but they have 3 
> databases that they use.
> 
> Mspdata       - This stores the completed data  - can get large
> Msplocal      - This is temporary data, such as appointments etc
> - should be relatively small
> Mspref        - This is Data like Item Codes, Bank Details, and other
Static
> data. - will be small
> 
> The application uses all 3 Databases which all have a 2 gig limit 
> giving them the ability to address 6 gig theoretically, getting around

> the 2gig restriction.
> 
> Clearer ??

Barry,

Much. Its just that no one was saying this.

I assume thenm there is some flexibility in how you could cut up an app
such as MD.

Results one database, Requests another. Letters another?

Is it flexible enough to allow the operation of primary and secondary
keys across the various databases? If so, you could reduce a 'database' 
to a single table?

Thanks

Greg

--
Greg Twyford
Information Management & Technology Program Officer Canterbury Division
of General Practice
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph.: 02 9787 9033
Fax: 02 9787 9200

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
***********************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail and their attached files,
including replies and forwarded copies, are confidential and intended
solely for the addressee(s) and may be legally privileged or prohibited
from disclosure and unauthorised use. If you are not the intended
recipient, any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure,
modification, distribution and/or publication or any action taken or
omitted to be taken in reliance upon this message or its attachments is
prohibited.

All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by
law.
***********************************************************************

_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to