SQL Server 2008 and Data Compression

SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.

Popular Topics

Home

Members

Calendar

Who's On

Home » Article Discussions » Article Discussions by Author » Discuss Content Posted by Nicholas Cain » SQL Server 2008 and Data Compression

23 posts, Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 »»»

SQL Server 2008 and Data Compression

Rate Topic

Display Mode

Topic Options

Author

Message

Nicholas Cain

Posted Tuesday, January 06, 2009 9:53 PM

SSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 4:27 PM
Points: 2,007, Visits: 6,040

Comments posted to this topic are about the item SQL Server 2008 and Data Compression

Shamless self promotion - read my blog http://sirsql.net

Post #631186

ddoyle

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:34 AM

Forum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 22, 2011 2:10 PM
Points: 4, Visits: 5

Thank you for your article. I'd like to know if anyone uses synonyms that point to a different database. I was thinking about moving all of my 'Fact' tables from the general database into a separate database and creating synonyms that point from the general database to the tables in the 'Fact' database. My rationale for this is that I could easily separate and manage the 'Master' tables from the 'Fact' tables and then I could set up the 'Fact' database with compression and leave the general database intact. Has anyone else done anything like this and if so what were your results?

Post #631455

noeld

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:52 AM

SSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 4:39 PM
Points: 6,260, Visits: 1,977

compression works at the "table" level why would you care to move it out of the database?

* Noel

Post #631472

ddoyle

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:18 AM

Forum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 22, 2011 2:10 PM
Points: 4, Visits: 5

Good point. I was thinking it was at the database level. I have other reasons for moving it into a separate database but it appears that compression is irrelevant. Thanks.

Post #631504

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:18 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:47 PM
Points: 31,406, Visits: 13,722

It doesn't make sense to move fact tables out. As mentioned above, compression works at the table level, and also at the index level. You can compress a table and not the indexes, or vice versa, or compress both.

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help

Post #631505

lucassouzace

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:04 AM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 1:10 PM
Points: 109, Visits: 79

hm, good .sql, but is biggest, rsrs i'm never look one this...
because i'm amateur, rsrs

Post #631567

John Rowan

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:24 AM

Hall of Fame

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:54 AM
Points: 3,837, Visits: 3,821

Good article. It was helpful to know about the allocation units. I am in the process of designing a data mart type application DB where we'll be storing billions of rows in some of our fact tables. I have been looking forward to testing out the performance benefits of data compression. Your timing for this article could not have been better. Thanks for sharing.....

John Rowan

======================================================
======================================================
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help - by Jeff Moden

Post #631595

Nicholas Cain

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:32 AM

SSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 4:27 PM
Points: 2,007, Visits: 6,040

The performance benefits and the space savings. I've always found it difficult to get additional storage on our SAN, so compression gives me a lot more leeway from a time perspective to get the disk space I need.

One of the things I neglected to mention was that compressed tables are still compressed further as a part of the SQL Server 2008 compressed backup (or third party backup solution), so your backups could actually be an order of magnitude than what they are currently. This is especially useful when you need to refresh development or test environments from those backups (provided that your dev and test are running a SQL Server edition that supports compression).

Shamless self promotion - read my blog http://sirsql.net

Post #631603

Anipaul

Posted Wednesday, January 07, 2009 10:15 AM

SSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 2:50 AM
Points: 4,785, Visits: 1,334

Nice article...:)

Post #631644

cppwiz

Posted Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:47 AM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 8:57 PM
Points: 163, Visits: 355

Great article and I especially like all the links to the references. A good follow-up article might be on how compression improves the performance of applications because more data can reside in buffers in memory instead of disk. Microsoft claims data warehouse performance can be increased by up to 40% due to less disk I/O. See the page compression sections of these articles:

Scaling Up Your Data Warehouse with SQL Server 2008

Best Practices for Data Warehousing with SQL Server 2008

Post #632658

« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

23 posts, Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 »»»

Permissions