Hello Everyone!
This topic was posted by me in Discussion forum and was relevant but I post it again here as it is more relevant to this forum which has been newly created only recently.
Question :
1 - Table lengths :- Fixed or dynamic or variable
Links SQL has a fixed colums design of the database. Why? Does this not require more space? When having 1,00,000 rows, every byte of space becomes more important.
2 - Multiple Databases ./. Single Database :-
What is more efficient - more Databases on the server and less tables or everything could be in the same database with different tables.
3 - While adding new definitions one has to give the VARCHAR / The size. Does this really matter?
4 - If I have 1,00,000 links in a table with all the normal information that the fat file makes from v2.0, for e.g. Then would it not be better to have it fragmented for the performance of SQL? I mean if I have the Key ID + few more data in the table and then further divide them, that would offer better performance.
While studying the routines of Links, I notices that conceptually, it takes Category/Category/Category... (Cat or Alt_Cat) And then the script ""Cleans it"".
My suggestion :- If from the begining if there was a system that there is no trailing slash names of the categories but simple names, for e.g. Instead of Canada/TheBeautiful/Vancouver/Says/OnTheHomepageOF/Gossamer if it was
Canada
TheBeautiful
Vancouver
Says
OnTheHomepageOF
Gossamer
Then all these could be related to anather set of hierarchies. Each set of hierarchy has a theme and they could be linked or grouped to form a bigger Matrix thereby giving a structure to buildup the ""Categories_Unclean""
This would give a system or a concept of Multi-Categories. May be...........
------------------
rajani
This topic was posted by me in Discussion forum and was relevant but I post it again here as it is more relevant to this forum which has been newly created only recently.
Question :
1 - Table lengths :- Fixed or dynamic or variable
Links SQL has a fixed colums design of the database. Why? Does this not require more space? When having 1,00,000 rows, every byte of space becomes more important.
2 - Multiple Databases ./. Single Database :-
What is more efficient - more Databases on the server and less tables or everything could be in the same database with different tables.
3 - While adding new definitions one has to give the VARCHAR / The size. Does this really matter?
4 - If I have 1,00,000 links in a table with all the normal information that the fat file makes from v2.0, for e.g. Then would it not be better to have it fragmented for the performance of SQL? I mean if I have the Key ID + few more data in the table and then further divide them, that would offer better performance.
While studying the routines of Links, I notices that conceptually, it takes Category/Category/Category... (Cat or Alt_Cat) And then the script ""Cleans it"".
My suggestion :- If from the begining if there was a system that there is no trailing slash names of the categories but simple names, for e.g. Instead of Canada/TheBeautiful/Vancouver/Says/OnTheHomepageOF/Gossamer if it was
Canada
TheBeautiful
Vancouver
Says
OnTheHomepageOF
Gossamer
Then all these could be related to anather set of hierarchies. Each set of hierarchy has a theme and they could be linked or grouped to form a bigger Matrix thereby giving a structure to buildup the ""Categories_Unclean""
This would give a system or a concept of Multi-Categories. May be...........
------------------
rajani
Links SQL : Database Design, Configuration + Multi-Cat