How Much Storage Space Does Nvarchar() Eats? Always Max?
Oct 5, 2006
Hello, everybody,
I am in need of storing long pieces of text in database, length between 2000 and 4000 characters (nvarchar limit).
If I have a column in a table:
my_text nvarchar(2000)
does this mean that in database the size used will always be 2000*2=4000 bytes at least (+ rounding), independent on what the real length of the text stored is?
Anoter alternative - storing texts in files is expected to become unmanageable very soon, so I would like to keep to the db.
I have a complex SSIS package which processes excel files, does some validation, fires off some SSRS reports which produce excel files, and finally sends out emails to groups of people with the appropriate file attached.It's been working fine, until recently. Now, when it reaches the send mail task, it raises an error:
Error: An error occured with the following error message: "Could not load file or assembly 'System.web, Versio 4.0.0.0, culture=neautral, publickeytoken= b0f5f7f11d50a3a' or one of its dependancies. Not enough storage space is available to process this command. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80070008)". Further down the report comes Microsoft.SqlServer.Dts.Tasks.SendMailRask.SendMailTask, Microsoft.SqlServer.SendMailTask, Version=11.0.0.0, culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91
This process completes normally when run in Visual Studio. It fails when run from SQL Server Agent.SQL Server Agent is currently running under my user credentials.
I am using sql server 2008 r2 on my end. I have created a database named testDB. I have a lot of tables with some log tables in this. some tables have contain lack of records in log table.
So my purpose is that I want to fix the table size of those tables(log tables) and want to move records in other database table placed on another location. So my database has no problem.
is there any way to make such above steps which I want for my database?
Is there already built any such functionality in sql server?
Hi,This is probably an easy question for someone so any help would beappreciated.I have changed the columns in a table that where nvarchar to the samesize of type varchar so halve the space needed for them.I have done this a) becuase this is never going to be an internationalapplication, b) we are running out of space and c) there are 100million rows.I have done this with the alter table statement which seems to work butthe space used in the database hasn't altered.I'm presuming that the way the records are structured within the tablethere is just now more space free inbetween each page???Is there a way or re-shrinking just an individual table and free upsome of the space in there or am i missing the point somewhere?Thanks in advance,Ian
In my current database design, there is one table (PState) which has a Primary Key (int) and a few other fields.
During development, a pattern started to arise; for certain rows in PState, I wanted to specify an additional set of columns (over 10 of them with quite large lengths) for each row in PState. However, as these additional columns would only be required in approximately 20% of the rows of PState, there would be plenty of NULL values in PState if I would make this table wider than necessary. So, I decided to create a separate table with those optional columns (PStateWFI). In order to attach these additional columns in PStateWFI to PState in the cases they were needed, I would obviously have to create a Foreign Key constraint on the Primary Key of PStateWFI so that these optional rows would know which row in PState they would belong to.
However, the problem with this approach is that one could define multiple rows in PStateWFI referring to the same row in PState, which would not make sense. Thus, a UNIQUE index constraint added to the constrained ID column in PStateWFI would make sense to ensure that there could only be one set of optional columns added to each row in PState. But now, when adding the UNIQUE index, the FK constraint started to appear as a bidirectional key link in the Diagram; hence, new entries in PState would have to meet a FK constraint based on PStateWFI, which was not intended.
Hence, I had to create a quite awkward design to enforce the constraints:
1. The PState table has a Primary Key (PState.ParticleID, int, Identity Specification: Yes) 2. The PStateWFI table has a Primary Key (PstateWFIID, int, Identity Specification: Yes) 3. PStateWFI has field "PStateID" which has a FK constraint to PState.ParticleID (which is a one-way constraint operating in the correct way and does not constrain insertions in PState) 4. PStateWFI has an additional column ParticleIDIndex which has a UNIQUE Index attached to it. 5. There is a check constraint on PStateWFI enforcing PStateWFI.ParticleIDIndex = PStateWFI.ParticleID.
Although this structure does the job, it makes it necessary to add a redundant column in PStateWFI by duplicating the PStateWFI.ParticleID into PStateWFI.ParticleIDIndex, since I can't create a UNIQUE index on PStateWFI.ParticleID without constraining the PState table as well. So, insertions into this table would have to insert the same value into two columns. Not a big deal, but appears slightly ugly.
Basically I'd hope someone could explain why a bidirectional FK constraint has to be enforced on the primary key table in a relationship when the constrained column in the primary key table has a UNIQUE index attached on it. I have a few other cases where the above approach would benefit from a more clear structure.
How to implement distinct storage tiers on SQL Remote BLOB Storage (RBS)?
I want to use this SQL Feature to move files(images, videos, pdf files) from a database to a distinct database dedicated to RBS. Then I want to have several storage tiers, where objects will be saved and moved according access frequency. Old data will be arquived in cheap storage, but it must be always accessible if needed.
Description: - 1st and main tier: new and frequently accessed objects stored in high performance storage; - 2nd tier: automatically move older or less accessed objects to an inexpensive and different storage tier; - in all cases, all objects must be accessible to all users, but accessing to archived objects(2nd tier) will be much slower;
I am a Windows developer for the IBM Tivoli Storage Manager Server (TSMS) product. Our product installation is built with InstallShield and uses the Windows Installer.
On a new installation of Windows 2003 x64 Storage Server R2, at a customer's site, the TSMS product fails to install. The install of the OS has version 3.01.400.3959 of the Windows Installer and I see no newer version that installs.
Part of our product is 32 bit (console) and another part is x64 (server). When installing I can see that the install's default is being redirected/reset to C:Program Files (x86)TivoliTSM after it is explicitly set by a custom action to ..Program Files.. . I further observe that our custom actions to write 64 bit registry entries are being refused.
REGSAM samMask = KEY_ALL_ACCESS; if ( regIsWow64Process () ) samMask = samMask | KEY_WOW64_64KEY; lStatus = RegCreateKeyEx( hLocalConnectKeyRoot, szSubkey, 0L, NULL, REG_OPTION_NON_VOLATILE, samMask, NULL, hKey, &dw ) ; The above fails to create the key.
We have tried four versions of our TSMS spanning many changes but the install acts the same. This does not happen on any other Windows OS we test on but we do not test on Windows 2003 Storage Server R2 being that it is an OEM product. We did test on Windows server 2003 R2 x64 and do not see this problem.
Do you have any suggestions on how to tackle this problem? I have full installation traces but can only see that the registry work is being refused. I can't see why.
Hi, we have a development server with SQL 2000 SP3 on it. The hardware is dual CPUs server with win2000 Server installed, plus 1Gb of RAM. With only 60 opened connections, the SQL server is using a 700Mb of RAM, so It became very slow, and I can't find the reason of it. Any ideas? With amount of open tables (objects) it doesn't look normal.
HI, I am running the below method which returns this error: The parameterized query '(@contactdate nvarchar(4000),@dnbnumber nvarchar(4000),@prospect' expects the parameter '@futureopportunity', which was not supplied" Please help.Private Shared Sub InsertData(ByVal sourceTable As System.Data.DataTable, ByVal destConnection As SqlConnection) ' old method: Lots of INSERT statements Dim rowscopied As Integer = 0 ' first, create the insert command that we will call over and over: destConnection.Open()Using ins As New SqlCommand("INSERT INTO [tblAppointmentDisposition] ([contactdate], [dnbnumber], [prospectname], [businessofficer], [phonemeeting], [followupcalldate2], [phonemeetingappt], [followupcalldate3], [appointmentdate], [appointmentlocation], [appointmentkept], [applicationgenerated], [applicationgenerated2], [applicationgenerated3], [comments], [newaccount], [futureopportunity]) VALUES (@contactdate, @dnbnumber, @prospectname, @businessofficer, @phonemeeting, @followupcalldate2, @phonemeetingappt, @followupcalldate3, @appointmentdate, @appointmentlocation, @appointmentkept, @applicationgenerated, @applicationgenerated2, @applicationgenerated3, @comments, @newaccount, @futureopportunity)", destConnection) ins.CommandType = CommandType.Textins.Parameters.Add("@contactdate", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@dnbnumber", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@prospectname", SqlDbType.Text) ins.Parameters.Add("@businessofficer", SqlDbType.NChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@phonemeeting", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@followupcalldate2", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@phonemeetingappt", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@followupcalldate3", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@appointmentdate", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@appointmentlocation", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@appointmentkept", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@applicationgenerated", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@applicationgenerated2", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ins.Parameters.Add("@applicationgenerated3", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@comments", SqlDbType.Text) ins.Parameters.Add("@newaccount", SqlDbType.NVarChar)ins.Parameters.Add("@futureopportunity", SqlDbType.NVarChar) ' and now, do the work: For Each r As DataRow In sourceTable.RowsFor i As Integer = 0 To 15 ins.Parameters(i).Value = r(i) Next ins.ExecuteNonQuery() 'If System.Threading.Interlocked.Increment(rowscopied) Mod 10000 = 0 Then 'Console.WriteLine("-- copied {0} rows.", rowscopied) 'End If Next End Using destConnection.Close() End Sub
Hi, I am trying to do this: UPDATE Users SET uniqueurl = replaceAllEmptySpacesInUniqueURL('uniqueurl') What would be the syntax. Any help appreciated. Thanks
I am generating a Report from Sql Data Source in Sql Server 2005 and viewing the Report in Report viewer control of Visual Studio 2005. The data in the Data Source contains string with multiple spaces (for example €œ Test String €œ) but when they get rendered in Report viewer control, multiple spaces gets converted to single space €? Test String €œ.
I tried following solutions 1) Replacing spaces with €œ €? 2) Inserting <pre> tag before the string and </pre> tag after the string (Also tried <Pre> instead of <pre>)
But in all the cases result is same. The Report Viewer control is showing €œ €? instead of space and €œ<Pre>€? tag instead of preserving spaces.
Please provide me a solution so that spaces can be preserved in Report Viewer.
I am using the below script to get space alerts  and now i am interested in sending alerts  if for any drive space available is Less than 10% or 15%.. how to convert beelow code to find in %Â
Hi.. I was doing a good maintenance on my DB and my trans log LDF keep growing until 30GB but my DB data file MDF is only 2GB. I found the two following method to reduce my log size.
Method 1: I used veritas to backup log file with truncate Method 2: I used the shrink database option in Enterprises manager to shrink it (file chosen=log , use default option)
After doing that, I found my LDF log file is still about the same size=27GB but when I see clearly, from the shrink database windows, the log spaced used reduced to only 100MB, the allocation log space is still 27GB. Why? How to make the LDF smaller to be the around the same size as the space used 100MB?
This is driving me bananas. Can't find any info on this anywhere....SQL 2000 seems to replace double space with a single space when I seta varchar field to " " (2spaces), it only stores " " (1space). Whyon earth would microsoft do this? If I save 2 spaces - I WANT TO SEE2 SPACES!!!!Can anyone help? Is this a database setting? Is this due to usingvarchar?Any help appreciated.Colin Hale
I made some copy of table and I have this error but on my hard disk i have 4 gig of empty space.
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14'
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space for object 'Backup_Date_11_24_00_Time_9_08_34_AM' in database 'LogActiviteIntramedia' because the 'PRIMARY' filegroup is full.
/Intranet_API/Forms/videTableLog.asp, line 16
My question is how can I increase the space of primary filegroup?
Hello Everyone and thanks for your help in advance. I am developing a document storage application for an intranet that will store various Word, Excel, and PDF documents. Most of the examples I see utilize SQL Server and an image field rather than the FileSystem Object to store documents. My concern with this method is that some of the documents may be several hundred pages (not exactly sure of the actual file size yet, but they must be fairly large). My question is, where does the use of SQL Server become impractical for this type of application? Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Does anyone know the upper limit of data size that one SQL 2K table can hold. I've seen 50GB tables in some warehousing servers, but what is the true limit. Soes the limit vary with the SQL2k version?
I have an MSDE installation on Windows server 2003. It looks like the C: drive is taking the brunt of the data when I load up the database. I would like to specify a different drive for data...Is there a way to do this?
How should i know size of the table in the DB. suppose my DB has 5 tables and the size of the DB is 500 MB. How can I know size of the indivdual table.
I'm migrating a images DB of a system I know the structure of the data tables and all type of data in it How can I learn about the STORAGE of IMAGES? In sql Server Where can I found information about that? I need to know something about that topic usually, whats the way for image’s storage ?
I am currently developing a system thats stores exchange stats in a db. Since our customers are companies with 20 employees up to 5 000 there a a big difference in the volume of data needed to be stored.
We currently thinking of supplying a SQL Server Express DB to the small customers and suggest a SQL Server to the bigger.
But since I would like to use the same structure for both types of customers I wonder how should i design the storeage.
Since the could be from 500 records a day up to 20 000. There are quite simple recordes with only simple datatypes. about 15 fields with no more than 10 chars each, mostly 2.
Should i separate the data in diffrent tables for a week or a day etc. Since I am only going to filter data on 1 or 2 fields the data will be easly indexed.
The reports generated will almost always only use 1-3 months of data, but historical reports have to be possible.
My question are ofcourse: Whats the best solution for me?
In MSQL Server 2000 how can I expand or use multiple transaction logs because the hard disk i am using windows dont have more than 4 GB free and the query i want to run overcomes this space. I have another one HDD with 20-30 GB free space and i want to use this disk so to use a second transaction log or move this log to this disk. Can this be happen and how ????
additional to data, what other type of information can be store in sql databases, i need to store pictures and mp3's that can be done, if not do you know what storage can be used for this purpose?
I have recently designed and built my first database using SQL server 2005 express. I have included an image (BLOB) column in one of the database tables. This is a bad idea according to some experts, and some say it is OK!
I am currently carrying out a trial with just 3 pictures via Visual Basic 2005 express forms, and there is no problem so far as the images are displayed for each record. But I anticipate between 300 - 1000 images for the table, and this could pose real problems for SQL server 2005 express and Visual Basic 2005 express, I guess.
I have just been reading that the cost of storing large images in the database is too high! I have also read it's better to store images (BLOB) into the file system because it is cheaper to store them no matter how many there are.
But the question is how I can reference an image in this path: C:PictureProductGrocery 0052745.jpg in the database table, so that when I select a record Visual Basic 2005 forms the image is displayed accordingly, similar as when stored directly in the database table? Your help very much appreciated.
From what I've read, if a row contains more than 8060 bytes and has varchar(MAX) columns in it, the data in those varchar(MAX) columns will be stored off-row. But what happens if you have two varchar(8000) columns instead and both contain more than 4030 bytes, is the data for both stored off-row? If so, just for that row, or for all rows in that table? And is there ever a good reason to have two varchar(8000) columns in a SQL Server 2005 table, instead of using varchar(MAX)?
Hi All from following link http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx i got this information
Bytes per row 8,060 Bytes per varchar(max), varbinary(max), xml, text, or image column 2^31-1 Characters per ntext or nvarchar(max) column 2^30-1
so is it means we can store in nvarchar(max) or varchar(max) upto 2^31-1 characters/bytes. but on the other hand we can store only 8060 bytes in a row. so the concept of Row-Overflow Data Exceeding 8 KB comes into picture. my questions is suppose i declare a variable of type varchar(max) then i can store upto 2^30-1 bytes in it and SQL Server on its own determine how and where to stores it.
hello group,is it possible to do a storage snapshot of a running ms-sql databasewithout losing transactions?What tasks must be done before such a snapshot.thanks in advance,Bernhard
i want to know how many data can storage into sql server compact edition. I've got a db into a pocket pc that has a table with about 2000 records inside; are they too records?
