When John returns in the morning, Miss Cooper tells him that Anne is emotionally unwell, and asks him to see her before she checks out of the hotel. After John leaves, Miss Cooper attempts to persuade Major Pollock to stay, but he refuses. The hotel residents eat their breakfast at separate tables in the dining room. John and Anne appear to reconcile, but they do not know if they can ever be happy, together or apart.
I am building a data warehouse. I need to get data from different sources and put it together so that I can generate reports. I will do lots of joining of tables. I am talking about maybe 20 tables total and each table is going to be anywhere from 100mb to 5 gigs.
If there's a logical or business separation, by all means put them in different databases. That's just clean data application development. However, if you're going to be joining or merging the different data sets, then you can save some overhead and admin costs by having a single database. 20 tables total isn't a lot (I'm working on a system that has about 3700 tables, though 1600 are audits). Keep in mind SQL Server is meant to scale up to terabytes of data, provided you have a decent model, indexes, etc.
If you're concerned with performance of the warehouse, you can jam that server full of RAM and harddrives. To leverage the harddrives properly you'd want to look at leveraging multiple files / filegroups and doling the tables out appropriately.
If you planning on having foreign key relationships between these tables (and it sounds like you would) then I would keep it all in one database. Typically I use separate databases for totally separate bodies of data.
Separate Tables, based on two one-act plays by Terence Rattigan, tells the story of lonely people longing for some connection in a society that dictates they remain apart. Nothing illustrates that better than the dining room of the Beauregard Private Hotel, where the film takes place. In the small British hotel, the permanent residents all dine at the same time, in the same room, at different tables. Although they greet each other and exchange pleasantries, they eat their meals in isolation.
I have two tables: tblProfessors with ProfessorID as the primary key and tblStudents with StudentID as the primary key. I'm wondering if it's possible to create a single foreign key (ID) in a separate table that is a combined list of ID's from tblProfessors and tblStudents.
I disagree with this model. A table should represent a set of entities. What you are calling the generic type should be an attribute. But I would assume that a professor and a student are totally different kinds of entities, and therefore need separate tables. What would you name the generic type? It needs a specific attribute name to be a valid data element and not "student_or_professor_role" as you have it.
Separate Tables is a two-act play, made up of two separate stories that take place several months apart. Though the setting and many of the characters remain the same, the two acts, known as Table by the Window and Table Number Seven, are not directly connected. In the first, a formerly abusive relationship is rekindled by a couple who cannot bear to be apart despite their troubled past. In the second, a man is revealed to be living a lie when his unorthodox and illegal sexual life is revealed. In each of these stories, Rattigan reveals an extraordinary depth of psychological insight, as well as a profound understanding of both the difficulty and importance of building relationships.
Has anyone seen a script that would let you select a table row and split the table at that point into two separate tables? We use a lot of data and a lot of rows in our tables. Sometimes the number of rows goes over the InDesign limit (10,000). Right now it's a tedious process to determine if we need a separate table. If we could split it and add additional rows to the 2nd table it would save a lot of time.
If you use tables in Microsoft Word to arrange items in your document or display structured data, there may come a time when you need to split a table into two. On the other hand, you might have two tables that you want to merge into one.
Suppose a traditional star-schemed relational database without loops. The db has separate tables and some tables with common keys. I could combine all tables intoone table by introducing an extra column called "Category" like in the picture.
Below is an example of email notification sent when a service catalog request is created. I can't seem to separate the following tables if there are multiple items in an order. Please see attached email script.
The instructions provided here pertain to tables included in the main article. The more closely your tables adhere to these requirements at submission, the fewer times you will need to revise your manuscript to meet them. Your tables will therefore publish more accurately and will be less likely to slow down publication of your accepted manuscript.
Tables must be editable, cell-based objects. We cannot typeset tables that are graphic objects. Use the table tool in your text editing software to create tables. If necessary, create tables in Excel and insert them into the manuscript. Do not insert text boxes or graphics within your tables.
There is a price to pay: this method precomputes some values and stores them in RAM. This quarter-size calculation required 6.75 GB RAM. A full-size calculation would therefore request 27 GB RAM. If you don't have that much, though, it is a simple matter to carve up the grid into smaller rectangles, do the calculation for each rectangle separately, and mosaic the pieces afterwards. The total calculation time would not appreciably increase.
Both of these options are designed to be a middle-ground between storing BLOBs either fully in SQL Server or fully outside (except for a string colun to retain the path). They allow for BLOBs to be a part of the data model and participate in Transactions while not wasting space in the buffer pool (i.e. memory). The BLOB data is still included in backups, which does make them take up more space and take longer to backup and to restore. However, I have a hard time seeing this as a true negative given that if it is part of the app then it needs to be backed up somehow, and having only a string column containing the path is completely disconnected and allows for BLOBs files to get deleted with no indication of that in the DB (i.e. invalid pointers / missing files). It also allows for files to be "deleted" within the DB but still exist on the file system which will need to eventually be cleaned up (i.e. headache). But, if the files are HUGE, then maybe it is best to leave entirely outside of SQL Server except for the path column. That helps with the "inside or outside" question, but does not touch on the single table vs multiple table question. I can say that, beyond this specific question, there are certainly valid cases for splitting tables into groups of columns based on usage patterns. Often when one has 50 or more columns there are some that are accessed frequently and some that are not. Some columns are written to frequently while some are mostly read. Separating frequently access vs infrequently accessed columns into multiple tables having a 1:1 relationship is quite often beneficial because why waste the space in the Buffer Pool for data you probably aren't using (similar to why storing large images in regular VARBINARY(MAX) columns is a problem)? You also increase the performance of the frequently access columns by reducing the row size and hence fitting more rows onto a data page, making reads (both physical and logical) more efficient. Of course, you also introduce some inefficiency by needing to duplicate the PK, and now sometimes you need to join the two tables, which also complicates (even if only slightly) some queries.
DataTables has to split the header, body and footer into separate tables in order to be able to have the header not move when the body is scrolled, and to do so without a scrollbar that covers the header. If we were okay having the scrollbar covering the header, we'd use something like FixedHeader to make the header static and frankly it would make a lot of things a lot easier, but I really don't like that as a UI design. 041b061a72