"Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:3d5206f8$0$227$cc9e4d1f_at_news.dial.pipex.com...
> "Stephen Ferracioli" <sferraci_at_pioneer-usa.com> wrote in message
> news:gkg49.798$UN5.58177778_at_newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > I'm pretty sure that I am deleting the *physically* first 500 Mb. I am
> loading a replacement set
> > of data. BW manages data by packets. The new packets are not available to
> the user until I
> > delete the old packets and activate the new ones. The data is physically
> stored in the sequence
> > it was sorted. The "star schema" is a *logical* representation of the data
> in BW. The foreign
> > keys of the star schema do not have any bearing on the sequence of data in
> the fact table. SAP
> > uses a relational dbms but the data is accessed using a network of
> pointers. Really wild stuff.
>
> The only way in which the data could be stored "in the sequence in which it
> was sorted" would be if the tables were index organised tables. I'd be
> surprised to find that this was the case.
My mistake. I meant to say that the data is stored in the sequence that it was loaded. Every
record contains a unique ID associated with its packet and date/time that it was loaded.
Received on Thu Aug 08 2002 - 11:13:07 CDT