Allen Gilliland wrote:
Elias Torres wrote:
David M Johnson wrote:
On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Elias Torres wrote:
Did you guys had a chance to look at this message?
Do you have some specific proposal for fixing this?
Breakout some of the big properties into a separate table?
huh? that sounds wacky to me. you are saying we need to move data
outside of the website table into different tables? i don't see how
that could be the case.
What if we dropped the old ignoreWords column, since it is no longer
used?
I tried without this column, but the problem still persisted. I think
I'm ok with the extra commands needed to make this work, I'm just
concerned with the size of the tuples in this table. I worry how big
we'll keep making this table with time. :(
i don't understand how this is an issue with the website table but not
the weblogentry table, which is pretty similar?
in the long term the website table will absolutely need to grow and i
don't really want to try wacky workarounds where we put things in
different tables just to work around limits in DB2. i think we should
definitely be removing any tables/columns that are no longer used and i
am fine with shortening columns that are overly long, like handle,
editorpage, and editortheme.
It's not a DB2 limit. It's just over the default temporary tablespace
size which can be fixed. However, I'm bringing up the issue we were
discussing sometime ago about length of rows in databases and how we
wanted this to be small. If we keep making this rows thousands of bytes
long, we will definitely be using a lot of disk and making our queries
slower due to disk access and so forth. If this is not the case, let's
keep on doing what we are doing.
