Re: datatype for string

On 09/08/2011 17:09, Art Kagel wrote: > It helps, but that assumes that the LVARCHAR even allows more than one > row to sit on a page without waste! I'm missing something.... > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Obnoxio The Clown > <obnoxio@serendipita.com <mailto:obnoxio@serendipita.com>> wrote: > > On 09/08/2011 16:58, Art Kagel wrote: > > Personally I prefer using a sub-table of smallish CHAR columns to a > large mostly empty LVARCHAR. That is most efficient in space and > processing. The only time I would use a large LVARCHAR is when > the vast > majority of rows will have the column mostly filled but when > there are a > small but significant number of rows that have no content or > very small > content. Then I think it is justified. If the size of the actual > content of the column varies widely, with most rows having partially > full content, I would go the sub-table route. > > > What's wrong with MAX_FILL_DATA_PAGES? > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio The Clown > > http://obotheclown.blogspot.__com <http://obotheclown.blogspot.com>; > I will now proceed to pleasure myself with this fish. > > -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com I will now proceed to pleasure myself with this fish.