Subject Re: [firebird-support] Re: split or not split a table with long rows ?
Author Ann Harrison
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:05 PM, nathanelrick <nathanelrick@...> wrote:

> by your message i understand you agree that it's a good thing to
> consolidate the table ?

Yes, probably, but first try storing a few thousand of the combined record
and see what
the storage requirement is in reality. Theory is fine, but practice is
practical. The gstat
utility will report on the actual space used by those rows, average stored
length, records,
page fill level, and other useful stuff. Look at those results before you
try to reduce the
size of the records. The changes may not be necessary.

> > Why not use a 16K page?
> i need first to do test ... 16k pages use Twice more memory, and in the
> database their is around 500 different tables, not sure all of them will
> like the 16k ... as far as i see now in the few test i have done it's that
> 16k is always better or very similar to 8k in speed ... i thing i will
> first double the memory of the server before to do that

With a large page size, you may be able to reduce the number of pages you
keep in cache - each data page will hold more records, each pointer page
will have more than twice as many pointers, each index page will have more
entries, each transaction inventory page will have more than twice as many

Good luck,


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]