Re: How Large Is Too Large?
- From: garrett.fitzsimons@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:41:11 -0700
On Jun 12, 9:30 pm, Allan Mitchell <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Joe,
In a DW structure I usually see Dimension tables with this number of columns
not fact tables. That said it is not INXS of column counts allowed and if
the number of columns is justifiable then so be it.
Watch out for width though. A fact table should be quite thin not least
because it could be carrying millions upon millions of rows.
--
Allan Mitchellhttp://wiki.sqlis.com|http://www.sqlis.com|http://www.sqldts.com|http://www.konesans.com
Hi,
Just got done with the requirements gathering and discovered
that my users want to measure about 200 items with the warehouse. So
I envision a Fact table with about 200 columns. This seems quite
large to me - but maybe other developers feel differently.
So my question is this: Is a data warehouse that contains a
single Fact table with 200 columns realistic and feasible? Or is a
single table with 200 columns a bad way to go?
JD- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Very interesting topic.
I guess the end-product is important here.
How will the end-user access the datawarehouse, via T-SQL based
Reports or via a cube or cubes ?
Will the facts be inserts only or will their be updates ?
Are all the facts related and can you easily guess which facts will be
reported on together ?
.
- Prev by Date: Order of columns using drillthrough
- Next by Date: Re: Order of columns using drillthrough
- Previous by thread: Order of columns using drillthrough
- Next by thread: Proclarity reports does not open up unless the OLAP services is re-started again.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
