while I have no real knowledge of this, I suspect that ultimately the limit of DBMan/Links 2 is factor of both the number of links AND the size of the file and maybe to a lesser degree the number of fields.
If you have 5,000 records and a filesize of 200K, things may be fine. Or maybe 500 records with 2,000k filesize would be OK. But maybe 5,000 records at 2,000k would cause DBMan/Links to freeze.
If you have 5000/500k with 6 fields, you have about 17 characters per field. I have almost 450k in 672 records. On that basis, if I had 5,000 records, I would have about 3,348k ( over 3 million in size ) or almost 7 times the size of a 500k file.
A computer scientist friend of mine tells me that the "flat file" structure of DBMan/Links is inherently inefficient and will eventually ( he said soon ) reach a limit of usability which is much less than say using something like mySQL.
But hey, I'm am glad to see a system with 5,000 records. Now if can find one with a file size of 3,000k...!
Gene
"The older I get, the more I admire competence, just simple competence in any field from adultery to zoology."
If you have 5,000 records and a filesize of 200K, things may be fine. Or maybe 500 records with 2,000k filesize would be OK. But maybe 5,000 records at 2,000k would cause DBMan/Links to freeze.
If you have 5000/500k with 6 fields, you have about 17 characters per field. I have almost 450k in 672 records. On that basis, if I had 5,000 records, I would have about 3,348k ( over 3 million in size ) or almost 7 times the size of a 500k file.
A computer scientist friend of mine tells me that the "flat file" structure of DBMan/Links is inherently inefficient and will eventually ( he said soon ) reach a limit of usability which is much less than say using something like mySQL.
But hey, I'm am glad to see a system with 5,000 records. Now if can find one with a file size of 3,000k...!
Gene
"The older I get, the more I admire competence, just simple competence in any field from adultery to zoology."