DBF to SQL Server 2000 Dilemma
From: Tim Payne <timnancy2000_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 13:33:33 -0800
Message-ID: <15397ace.0310291333.6a05209a_at_posting.google.com>
I am porting a DBF-based data model to SQL Server 2000. The data model is a (one) master table with 37 detail tables. Is this a good idea to have one table with 37 relationships (referential integrity) to it? Has anyone seen such a design in production on SQL Server? The DBF size is nearly 1 gig. On SQL Server 2000, the size is nearly 2 gig. The master table has 80,000 rows. Five detail tables have a million plus. Received on Wed Oct 29 2003 - 22:33:33 CET
Date: 29 Oct 2003 13:33:33 -0800
Message-ID: <15397ace.0310291333.6a05209a_at_posting.google.com>
I am porting a DBF-based data model to SQL Server 2000. The data model is a (one) master table with 37 detail tables. Is this a good idea to have one table with 37 relationships (referential integrity) to it? Has anyone seen such a design in production on SQL Server? The DBF size is nearly 1 gig. On SQL Server 2000, the size is nearly 2 gig. The master table has 80,000 rows. Five detail tables have a million plus. Received on Wed Oct 29 2003 - 22:33:33 CET