Re: Theoretical Design Question

Hey Peter,

I tried to respond to you directly, and it didn't work... I guess you just wouldn't want that :-)

First of all, let me mention that "ambitious" is my middle name :-)

However, I am aware of the fact that it could take some time until the application will work with 1 billion users - however - there is relevant information I haven't discussed in the newsgroup.

While re-considering the structure of things, I decided that each item in the system may have up to 3000 (or whatever) properties, however most of them will have much less (around 100). So we have a table of items, a table of properties, and a many-to-many relationship between the two - so I'll create another table to relate between them.

I haven't yet reached the technical design stage of the project (it will take me up to a few days to get there), but onec I'm there, and have some planned database architecture, I'll be happy to share whatever I can with you.

Thanks for your time and help,
Oz

• Original Message ----- From: "Peter Wilson" <spam.peterwilson69_at_optusnet.com.au> Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 6:18 PM Subject: Re: Theoretical Design Question

> Hi,
>
> As of 07/01/00 the Earth's population is estimated to be 6,073,104,685. If
> your project is aiming to capture 1/6th of this planet's population, then
 it
> one of the most ambitious projects I have ever heard of. Have I
> misunderstood something? A billion is 1000 million isn't it?
>
> There are several ways to implement the 3000 different attributes per
> person. Let's assume that out of this 1 billion people, that 100 of these
> people (0.00001%) have identical attributes. If this is the case, you can
> avoid entering and storing redundant data. Depending on the way your
 tables
> are related, you could have 1 Billion rows in one table, and anything up
 to
> 3 Trillion rows in another table (1 billion x 3000 attributes). I would be
> happy to help, but I'd like to know a bit more about the database tables
 and
> relationships you plan.
>
> Cheers,
> Pete
Received on Wed Feb 02 2000 - 00:00:00 CET