|
|
Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 11/26/06 10:34
(ramraj@gmail.com) writes:
> Hello people,
> I might sound a little bit crazy, but is there any possibility that you
> can incorporate 4^15 (1,073,741,824) tables into a SQL Database?
>
> I mean, is it possible at all? There might be a question of where
> anyone would want so many tables, but i'm a bioinformatics guy and I'm
> trying to deal with genomic sequences and was coming up with a new
> algorithm, where the only limit is the number of tables I can put into
> a Database.
>
> So, can you please advise if its possible to put in so many tables into
> a SQL database? Or is the Bekerley DB better?
The maximum number of objects in an SQL Server database is 2^31-1,
or 2.147.483.647 and thus > 4^15. "Objects" in this context are tables,
stored procedures, views etc. Note that this answer applies specifically
to MS SQL Server. If you with "SQL Database" means about any RDBMS, beware
that the answer is likely to be different for each product.
I don't really know why you think you need this many tables. But if the
tables all are to have the set of columns, then you only need one table,
but with more columns to keep the different portions of the table apart.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|