What is the maximum number of columns witin SQL Server 2008? I know at least in 2005 the limitations were related to row size, does this still apply?
Right after I define and populate this ridiculously wide table I will need to write an SSIS package against it. Are there different limitations for SSIS for number of columns than there are for SQL Server?
In essence I have a very large number of attributes about an entity that for a number of reasons will need to be stored on one table and then extracted in that same columns wide format and I want to make sure what the rules are within SQL Server 2008 and SSIS 2008.
SQL Server 2008 has a max for Wide and NonWide. Unless you've taken special steps to use sparse columns, you've got a NonWide table.
Columns per nonwide table 1,024
Columns per wide table 30,000
Row size limitations (with a caveat, see details in specs below):
Bytes per row 8,060
Maximum Capacity Specifications for SQL Server 2008
More on Wide and NonWide at MSDN.
Related
Is there any option in SQL server 2016 to change column order still, without creating a temp table, and recreating/reinserting whole table? Link below is for 2005.
We have a 500 Million row table in data warehouse. We want to insert a column in the middle. Either we can recreate the table, or utilize 300+ views for all our tables, which have similar situation. The view becomes another meta data presentation layer we have to manage. Wish sql server is smart enough to change column orders easier like Aurora or Postgresql.
How to change column order in a table using sql query in sql server 2005?
Is there any option in SQL server 2016 to change column order still, without creating a temp table, and recreating/reinserting whole table?
No. Column ordinals in SQL Server control the visible order of the columns and the physical layout of the data.
I am started using SQL Server 2012 MDS for maintaining our huge customer base. My question is whether MDS supports more than 10 million records? If so, how it is handled in excel? Excel has the number of rows limitation of 1 million.
Below is Quote from technet on same,posting relevant content here
Create Entity: Creating an entity from an Excel table is dependent on both the number of records and the number of columns, and appears to be linear in its progression. The number of attributes supported is based on SQL table limits, while the number of members will be constrained by Excel worksheet row limitations of 1M rows.
In Microsoft SQL Server, if I have a column of VARCHAR(255) and a column of VARCHAR(511) and compare the two columns in a query, does SQL Server have to implicitly convert the columns as it would if the were different data types?
I've checked the execution plan as well as the plan cache and cannot find any reference to an implicit conversion, but I'm having difficulty swallowing that SQL Server just handles it as well as if they were the same size.
I have a table (myTable) in which I have a field flagged as being a Filestream, on this server it is the only filestream and it saves to the filestream location of F:\foo
SELECT COUNT(1) FROM myTable results in 37,314 but the folder properties of F:\foo are 36,358 files. All the rows in myTable have data in the Filestream column, does that mean 956 were complete duplicates?
If so, how does SQL Server determine what is and what is not a duplicate (is it a complete binary compare? as I don't think it would be worth SQL Storing data at a block-differential level)? As I can't seem to find any information SQL Server consolidating duplicate records for filestreams.
Additionally when I re-save many of the same records again (making the count say 45,000) the total files in F:\foo increase which to me indicates that the duplicate checking (if there is any such thing) is not perfect.
Does SQL Server consolidate similar files in filestreams together or not? Is there a stored procedure that can be executed to cause SQL to re-scan the filestream filegroup and look for further duplicates to consolidate existing space?
Server in question is SQL Server 2012 Enterprise with SP1 but has also happened on our UAT SQL Server 2012 Standard Edition with SP1 box.
I have a product table where the description column is fulltext indexed.
The problem is, users frequently search a single word, which happens to be in the noiseXXX.txt files.
We'd like to keep the noise word functionality enabled, but is there anyway to turn it off just for this one column?
I think you can do this in 2008 with the SET STOPLIST=OFF, but I can't seem to find similar functionality in SQL Server 2005.
In SQL Server 2005, noise word lists are applied to the entire server. You can disable noise words for the entire server by deleting the appropriate noise word file and then re-building the full text indices. But I do not believe it is possible in SQL Server 2005 to selectively disable noise words for a single table. See for instance here, here and here.
In SQL Server 2008, FTS moves from using noise word files to stop lists. Stop lists are containers that contain collections of stopwords which are not included in full text indices and replace the functionality of noise word files.
In SQL Server 2008 (compatibility level 100 only) you can create multiple stoplists for a given language, and stoplists can be specified for individual tables. That is, one table could use a given stoplist, a second table could use a different stoplist, and a third could use no stoplists at all. Stoplist settings apply to an entire table, so if you have multiple columns indexed in a single table, they all must use the same stoplist.
So to answer your question, I do not believe it is possible in SQL Server 2005 to selectively disable noise words for individual tables while leaving them on for other tables. If this is a deal-breaker for you, this might be a good opportunity to upgrade your server to SQL Server 2008 or 2012.