Ann W. Harrison wrote:

> d2ortiz_cool wrote:
>
>>A few months i have a database of 142,415,004 kb with these definition
>>

Right, and at that point it appeared that you were running into a
problem with the number of records in the table - the record id is 4
bytes but the number space is not dense, and the number of records that
can be stored in a table depends on the size of the records and on the
number of blob pieces that are stored on pages. You get more records if
they're smaller (2,704,238,667 records if the compressed data size is 10
bytes, but only 1,089,767,821 records if the compressed data size is 50
bytes) but you get more volume of data if the records are larger
(27,042,386,670 bytes of compressed data in ten byte records, but
54,488,391,056 byte of compressed date in 50 byte records).

Unfortunately, small blobs and the upper level of larger blobs also
consume record number space. It's possible, though unlikely, that you
may have run into that problem again.

Regards,

Ann