Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««56789

Database Size Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Sunday, February 14, 2010 7:52 AM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:29 PM
Points: 8,562, Visits: 9,063
I agree with many of the comments so far: this was not a good QOTD.
The correct answer is that the a default create with no parameters supplied other than the name will create a db with primary data file size same as in the model db and log file size 1MB -or maybe not 1MB but something else? I think Hugo gave some strange rules for initial log file sizes which are not the same as those given in the BOL entries for Create Database in T-SQL Reference for SQL2008, for SQL2005, or for SQL2000, and he referenced MSDN documentation for them.

The options for the answer all all just numbers of MB, so the question needs to specify the version of SQL Server (and maybe whether it is an evaluation copy or some beta or the ready to go version), and even then the person trying to answer would have to assume that it was an implied rule that the model database size was as shipped by MS - and even with that assumption the edition of SQL Server as well as the version would have to be stipulated, because the size of the model database files varies from edition to edition: that the sizes of the model database files are not the same in all editions is documented in BOL: for SQLS 2005 in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186388(SQL.90).aspx, for SQL 2008 in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186388.aspx, and for SQL 2000 in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa174522(SQL.80).aspx.


Tom
Post #865261
Posted Sunday, February 14, 2010 6:59 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:30 PM
Points: 36,766, Visits: 31,222
Heh... the correct answers are actually missing for all versions.... "Based on Model" and "Too Small".

--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #865344
Posted Monday, February 15, 2010 5:47 PM
Grasshopper

GrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopper

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, December 23, 2012 4:51 PM
Points: 22, Visits: 68
SQL 2008 3mb for mdf 1 for ldf
Post #865796
Posted Thursday, February 18, 2010 3:52 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 2:25 AM
Points: 217, Visits: 521
Jeff Moden (2/14/2010)
Heh... the correct answers are actually missing for all versions.... "Based on Model" and "Too Small".


Best response yet, IMHO....
Post #867862
Posted Friday, February 26, 2010 4:52 PM
SSC-Addicted

SSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, June 13, 2014 12:17 PM
Points: 406, Visits: 224
It appears there is confusion rampant with this question.

It asks how large is the database. The question does *NOT* say anything about what are the total sizes of the files created.

Since the .mdf file is essentially the "database" and the .ldf file is the transaction log, this question is poorly worded, badly formed and subject to existing sizes in the model database - which is well beyond the scope (or probably the intention) of the question.

The version issues (SQL 2000/2005/2008) notwithstanding, this is just someone trying to be cute, not ask a meaningful question.

I love the questions that make me think or teach me something - neither of these attributes were present in this question.

Sorry to be harsh, but questions like this should not be posted.
Post #873758
Posted Monday, March 15, 2010 10:24 PM


Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, June 13, 2014 3:03 PM
Points: 594, Visits: 655
Not sure where all of these 3mb/1mb numbers are coming from but when I do fresh installs of SQL 2005 or 2008 (which I do a couple of times a month in the classroom from a dvd) the new databases always default to 2mb for mdf and 1mb for ldf and that is for dev, standard or ent editions. I also checked my production servers on 2005 and 2008 and I could not find one that defaulted to anything else... great question and sort of has me thinking, but that creates 2 more questions:

1. Who is going to use a 2MB database?
2. Didn't someone say "size doesn't matter"?


Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
Post #883540
Posted Tuesday, March 30, 2010 10:28 AM


SSChampion

SSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampion

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:56 PM
Points: 11,192, Visits: 11,096
I do love an ambiguous/controversial QotD: the discussion is always fascinating.



Paul White
SQL Server MVP
SQLblog.com
@SQL_Kiwi
Post #893029
Posted Wednesday, March 31, 2010 4:47 AM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:29 PM
Points: 8,562, Visits: 9,063
Paul White NZ (3/30/2010)
I do love an ambiguous/controversial QotD: the discussion is always fascinating.

Fascinating isn't the word I would use for this discussion: the number of different wrong answers suggested is amazing, very few people seem to have noticed that there is no correct answer available. Perhaps "Astounding" would be a better word ths time (I hesitate to suggest "Appalling" because there were a few good comments).


Tom
Post #893617
Posted Wednesday, March 31, 2010 8:12 AM


Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, June 13, 2014 3:03 PM
Points: 594, Visits: 655
Tom.Thomson (3/31/2010)
Paul White NZ (3/30/2010)
I do love an ambiguous/controversial QotD: the discussion is always fascinating.

Fascinating isn't the word I would use for this discussion: the number of different wrong answers suggested is amazing, very few people seem to have noticed that there is no correct answer available. Perhaps "Astounding" would be a better word ths time (I hesitate to suggest "Appalling" because there were a few good comments).


Surprising is my word. Just shows how little you need to understand the product to use and administer it. No wonder Microsoft rules the software world and I can be a DBA...


Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
Post #893795
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««56789

Permissions Expand / Collapse