DataBase Space

Hello, All!
I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space Total
and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of this
StoreProcedure.
If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused results
or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
Thanks
Juliano Horta
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200602/1
> I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space
> Total
> and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
> I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of
> this
> StoreProcedure.
> If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused
> results
> or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
Why don't you look at the source code for sp_spaceused and adapt it for your
own needs?
|||Use the undocumented command DBCC ShowFileStats. It supports the WITH
TABLERESULTS option so you can dump the data into a table and work with it.
This is what Enterprise Mangler uses to populate the file used graphs on the
Taskpad pane.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Juliano H via droptable.com" <u13014@.uwe> wrote in message
news:5b3d9946b1a22@.uwe...
> Hello, All!
> I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space
> Total
> and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
> I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of
> this
> StoreProcedure.
> If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused
> results
> or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
> Thanks
> Juliano Horta
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200602/1
|||Hi,
Try this to see whats in sp_spaceused...
sp_helptext 'sp_spaceused'
Thanks,
Sree
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> Use the undocumented command DBCC ShowFileStats. It supports the WITH
> TABLERESULTS option so you can dump the data into a table and work with it.
> This is what Enterprise Mangler uses to populate the file used graphs on the
> Taskpad pane.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Juliano H via droptable.com" <u13014@.uwe> wrote in message
> news:5b3d9946b1a22@.uwe...
>
>

DataBase Space

Hello, All!
I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space Total
and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of this
StoreProcedure.
If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused results
or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
Thanks
Juliano Horta
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200602/1> I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space
> Total
> and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
> I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of
> this
> StoreProcedure.
> If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused
> results
> or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
Why don't you look at the source code for sp_spaceused and adapt it for your
own needs?|||Use the undocumented command DBCC ShowFileStats. It supports the WITH
TABLERESULTS option so you can dump the data into a table and work with it.
This is what Enterprise Mangler uses to populate the file used graphs on the
Taskpad pane.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Juliano H via SQLMonster.com" <u13014@.uwe> wrote in message
news:5b3d9946b1a22@.uwe...
> Hello, All!
> I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space
> Total
> and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
> I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of
> this
> StoreProcedure.
> If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused
> results
> or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
> Thanks
> Juliano Horta
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200602/1|||Hi,
Try this to see whats in sp_spaceused...
sp_helptext 'sp_spaceused'
Thanks,
Sree
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Use the undocumented command DBCC ShowFileStats. It supports the WITH
> TABLERESULTS option so you can dump the data into a table and work with it.
> This is what Enterprise Mangler uses to populate the file used graphs on the
> Taskpad pane.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Juliano H via SQLMonster.com" <u13014@.uwe> wrote in message
> news:5b3d9946b1a22@.uwe...
> > Hello, All!
> >
> > I'm creating a script to collect DataBase Space used and DataBase space
> > Total
> > and after that I will store this information in a table in my SQL Server.
> > I've tryed using sp_spaceused but I don't know how to use the result of
> > this
> > StoreProcedure.
> > If anyone know how to get this information using either sp_spaceused
> > results
> > or t-sql script example, it would be great for me.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Juliano Horta
> >
> > --
> > Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> > http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200602/1
>
>

Database Size

If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400 gig),
is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and let it
auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
Or would it take the same amount of time?Steve wrote:
> If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400 gig)
,
> is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and let it
> auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
> Or would it take the same amount of time?
>
>
If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation
to worry about later.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||I know the import would run faster, as it wouldn't have to pause to claim
more disk space. But would I be saving time over all or would it take the
same amount of time?
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:e8zyPUopGHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
> If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
> one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
> initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation to
> worry about later.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster than
creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:e8zyPUopGHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
> If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
> one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
> initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation to
> worry about later.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Steve wrote:
> I know the import would run faster, as it wouldn't have to pause to claim
> more disk space. But would I be saving time over all or would it take the
> same amount of time?
>
Overall, the entire growth + import process will probably take as long
as just initially creating the database that size. Fragmentation
resulting from the constant addition of 1GB chunks would be your concern
if you let it auto-grow. You'll end up with chunks of the database
scattered all over the disk, causing additional disk overhead when
retrieving data.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Steve wrote:
> would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster th
an
> creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
>
Probably not, because you're still initializing the same amount of
space. If you could create them simultaneously, on seperate I/O
channels, then yes.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Thanks for your help.
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:OD$9QhopGHA.4424@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
> Probably not, because you're still initializing the same amount of space.
> If you could create them simultaneously, on seperate I/O channels, then
> yes.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||One more thing to consider about autogrow: you have no control over when the
growth happens - so a random insert/update could cause growth and IO delays
at a busy period for your server. Far better for you to manage the growth of
the server yourself.
On SQL 2005, you can setup the system such that file growth is instantaneous
(i.e. the file is not zeroed when its created or grown)
Thanks
Paul Randal
Lead Program Manager, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstor...ne/default.aspx
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Steve" <ss@.Mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:ee26VkopGHA.4760@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for your help.
>
> "Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
> news:OD$9QhopGHA.4424@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>

Database Size

Hi,
I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
size automatically.
How can I create database with Fixed size
Thanks
Mothi KannanIn sql Enterprise Manager right click your database and use the data and log
tabs to set the sizes. be sure to uncheck the autogrow stuff..
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Mothi" <Mothi@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AAF530A-5462-4E60-8D28-D76D7429DFC4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
> respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
> using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
> size automatically.
> How can I create database with Fixed size
> Thanks
> Mothi Kannan

Database Size

If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400 gig),
is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and let it
auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
Or would it take the same amount of time?Steve wrote:
> If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400 gig),
> is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and let it
> auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
> Or would it take the same amount of time?
>
>
If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation
to worry about later.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||I know the import would run faster, as it wouldn't have to pause to claim
more disk space. But would I be saving time over all or would it take the
same amount of time?
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:e8zyPUopGHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
>> If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400
>> gig), is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and
>> let it auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
>> Or would it take the same amount of time?
>>
> If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
> one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
> initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation to
> worry about later.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster than
creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:e8zyPUopGHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
>> If I'm creating a db from an inport, and I know it will be large (400
>> gig), is it faster to create the DB that size, or create a 1 gig DB and
>> let it auto grow by 1 gig at a time when it needs it during the import?
>> Or would it take the same amount of time?
>>
> If you plan to keep this database for a while, I would create it all at
> one time. Your import will run faster, and, assuming you can create the
> initial file as one contiguous file, you won't have disk fragmentation to
> worry about later.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Steve wrote:
> I know the import would run faster, as it wouldn't have to pause to claim
> more disk space. But would I be saving time over all or would it take the
> same amount of time?
>
Overall, the entire growth + import process will probably take as long
as just initially creating the database that size. Fragmentation
resulting from the constant addition of 1GB chunks would be your concern
if you let it auto-grow. You'll end up with chunks of the database
scattered all over the disk, causing additional disk overhead when
retrieving data.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Steve wrote:
> would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster than
> creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
>
Probably not, because you're still initializing the same amount of
space. If you could create them simultaneously, on seperate I/O
channels, then yes.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Thanks for your help.
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:OD$9QhopGHA.4424@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Steve wrote:
>> would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster
>> than creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
> Probably not, because you're still initializing the same amount of space.
> If you could create them simultaneously, on seperate I/O channels, then
> yes.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||One more thing to consider about autogrow: you have no control over when the
growth happens - so a random insert/update could cause growth and IO delays
at a busy period for your server. Far better for you to manage the growth of
the server yourself.
On SQL 2005, you can setup the system such that file growth is instantaneous
(i.e. the file is not zeroed when its created or grown)
Thanks
--
Paul Randal
Lead Program Manager, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Steve" <ss@.Mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:ee26VkopGHA.4760@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for your help.
>
> "Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
> news:OD$9QhopGHA.4424@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Steve wrote:
>> would creating the db with a 200 gig mdf and 200 gif ndf file be faster
>> than creating a single 400 gig mdf file?
>>
>> Probably not, because you're still initializing the same amount of space.
>> If you could create them simultaneously, on seperate I/O channels, then
>> yes.
>>
>> --
>> Tracy McKibben
>> MCDBA
>> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>

Database Size

Hi,
I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
size automatically.
How can I create database with Fixed size
Thanks
Mothi KannanIn sql Enterprise Manager right click your database and use the data and log
tabs to set the sizes. be sure to uncheck the autogrow stuff..
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Mothi" <Mothi@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AAF530A-5462-4E60-8D28-D76D7429DFC4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
> respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
> using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
> size automatically.
> How can I create database with Fixed size
> Thanks
> Mothi Kannan

Database Size

Hi,
I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
size automatically.
How can I create database with Fixed size
Thanks
Mothi Kannan
In sql Enterprise Manager right click your database and use the data and log
tabs to set the sizes. be sure to uncheck the autogrow stuff..
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Mothi" <Mothi@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AAF530A-5462-4E60-8D28-D76D7429DFC4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have create Database with size 200 md and 40 mb for mdf and ldf
> respectively (Fixed Size - not go grow or shrink) while creating database,
> using wizard, little later i checked database size it became with default
> size automatically.
> How can I create database with Fixed size
> Thanks
> Mothi Kannan

database role secureables not shows up

Hello!

After creating a new database role I have add some permissions. Now, when I want to view the role an the permissions the secureables page are empty.

This problem is only within the management studio. If I use Enterprise Manager I can see that the changes are taking effect.

Any hints?

Lutz

I see the same, I will open a bug on this.

If you would like to know whether the the permissions are granted to an object, right click the object and select ->Properties and view the permissions tab

Thanks,

Gops Dwarak

Database Question

Is there a minimum number of operating system files you need when creating a database in 2005?

What do you mean by operating system files ?

Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||If by OS files, you mean, what is the minimun number of files required for a SQL Server database, the answer is two; a datafile and a transaction log file.|||If you are talking about installation then it requires some system files which may be found in .net framework. otherwise your question seems unclear. Please specify what you r trying to do actually.

Database Query... Novice Alert...No Idea Where to Turn...

Hello,

I'm creating a website for a student organization at my university. Basically, I have an Excel file with a list of contacts that the members of our organization need to be able to search on our website.

The only field that I need our members to be able to search is "contact location." So for example, a member might want to know if our organization has any contacts in Spain, so the member would type "spain" into the "contact location search" field" and would get results.

I really don't known where to turn... I need the easiest thing that would be manageable for a novice. It doesn't need to be an intense search function; just something to make the website functional (so it obviously needs to be uploadable to a server; the server has PHP capability...no idea if that has any relevance). I've been searching around all day and have come across potentials like PHP, SQL, XML, etc. but have no idea which way to turn... I have Office and Adobe Studio programs at my disposal.

Thank you all-powerful and all-knowing web gods! I owe you my deepest gratitude!

Mikey
:beer:Start by finding out what type of resources you have at your disposal for the university. Whether you use ASP/ASP.NET/PHP/MYSQL/MSSQL will likely determine the appropriate choice. From there you'll have at least a starting point.

Database or Server?

I am creating a site where users can create blogs and upload photos etc...I
just realized that my hosting account with GoDaddy has a 100 MB limit on the
SQL Server database...due to that I decided to store all photos on the serve
r
and just store the file path in the database...is that a good idea?
Also, what should I do with my blog entries? Should I store them as Text in
the database or should I create them as files on the server similar to the
photos?
Does anybody know if there are any hosting plans with a higher database
limit (for .NET 2.0 and SQL Server 2000/2005)? Or do I need to get a
dedicated server for that?>I am creating a site where users can create blogs and upload photos etc...I
> just realized that my hosting account with GoDaddy has a 100 MB limit on
> the
> SQL Server database...due to that I decided to store all photos on the
> server
> and just store the file path in the database...is that a good idea?
YES! Disk space for files is cheaper and much more efficient, with the only
real cost being losing the ability to backup all the files in the same
"transaction" so to speak as backing up the data.

> Also, what should I do with my blog entries? Should I store them as Text
> in
> the database or should I create them as files on the server similar to the
> photos?
Well, for 100 MB, let's say the average blog entry is 5K, that's 200
entries. So, do you expect to have 100 users with one blog entry each per
day? If so, you're out of space after 2 days. And that's without taking
away from the space required by the entries for photos, comments, member
information etc.

> Does anybody know if there are any hosting plans with a higher database
> limit (for .NET 2.0 and SQL Server 2000/2005)? Or do I need to get a
> dedicated server for that?
If you're sharing a SQL Server database server with other clients, there is
always going to be a threshold. It sounds like you need a more
comprehensive solution.|||Hi Swami,
I'd go with photos on the server and blog entries in the database. I don't
know about hosting plans.
"Swami" wrote:

> I am creating a site where users can create blogs and upload photos etc...
I
> just realized that my hosting account with GoDaddy has a 100 MB limit on t
he
> SQL Server database...due to that I decided to store all photos on the ser
ver
> and just store the file path in the database...is that a good idea?
> Also, what should I do with my blog entries? Should I store them as Text
in
> the database or should I create them as files on the server similar to the
> photos?
> Does anybody know if there are any hosting plans with a higher database
> limit (for .NET 2.0 and SQL Server 2000/2005)? Or do I need to get a
> dedicated server for that?
>|||> Well, for 100 MB, let's say the average blog entry is 5K, that's 200
> entries.
Is this right?
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> YES! Disk space for files is cheaper and much more efficient, with the on
ly
> real cost being losing the ability to backup all the files in the same
> "transaction" so to speak as backing up the data.
>
> Well, for 100 MB, let's say the average blog entry is 5K, that's 200
> entries. So, do you expect to have 100 users with one blog entry each per
> day? If so, you're out of space after 2 days. And that's without taking
> away from the space required by the entries for photos, comments, member
> information etc.
>
> If you're sharing a SQL Server database server with other clients, there i
s
> always going to be a threshold. It sounds like you need a more
> comprehensive solution.
>
>|||Thanks! What types of comprehensive solutions are available? I am pretty
new to the hosting world, and I am not sure what my options are...
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> YES! Disk space for files is cheaper and much more efficient, with the on
ly
> real cost being losing the ability to backup all the files in the same
> "transaction" so to speak as backing up the data.
>
> Well, for 100 MB, let's say the average blog entry is 5K, that's 200
> entries. So, do you expect to have 100 users with one blog entry each per
> day? If so, you're out of space after 2 days. And that's without taking
> away from the space required by the entries for photos, comments, member
> information etc.
>
> If you're sharing a SQL Server database server with other clients, there i
s
> always going to be a threshold. It sounds like you need a more
> comprehensive solution.
>
>|||>> Well, for 100 MB, let's say the average blog entry is 5K, that's 200
> Is this right?
You're right, my decimal places were off, I did 1 MB instead of 10 MB. My
point remains intact (you get a longer lead time to find a bigger area for
your data).|||On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:53:01 -0700, Ryan Randall
<RyanRandall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Is this right?
No, but what are a few decimal places among friends? Just shift it
over two places, 20000 entries by that rough calculation.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT|||200 * 5K = 1000K = 1MB
so you would have space for 200,000 blog entries of 5K each.
On a completely unrelated note:
In 1870 Dr. E. von Wolf published a study on spinach and misplaced the
decimal point regarding the iron content. As a result he reported that the
content was 10 times higher than it actually is. Thw mistake was not found
and corrected until 1937.
"Ryan Randall" <RyanRandall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8768F602-CEEB-444E-84B8-003696D88874@.microsoft.com...
> Is this right?
>
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:
>
etc...I
on
only
Text
the
per
taking
database
is|||And there I go, misplacing my own decimal point. How ironic is that?
Should be 20,000, not 200,000.
"Jim Underwood" <james.underwoodATfallonclinic.com> wrote in message
news:%23pvbTqIaGHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> 200 * 5K = 1000K = 1MB
> so you would have space for 200,000 blog entries of 5K each.
> On a completely unrelated note:
> In 1870 Dr. E. von Wolf published a study on spinach and misplaced the
> decimal point regarding the iron content. As a result he reported that
the
> content was 10 times higher than it actually is. Thw mistake was not
found
> and corrected until 1937.
> "Ryan Randall" <RyanRandall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8768F602-CEEB-444E-84B8-003696D88874@.microsoft.com...
> etc...I
limit
> on
the
the
> only
> Text
to
> the
> per
> taking
member
> database
there
> is
>|||Yes. And surely you can see that either number is not all that scalable; if
the OP is building a blog site that has any chance of being even remotely
successful, they will quickly be sing more space.

> And there I go, misplacing my own decimal point. How ironic is that?
> Should be 20,000, not 200,000.