Post reply

DATABASE / TABLE SIZE ESTIMATER

  • October 1, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    #178447

    Comments posted to this topic are about the item DATABASE / TABLE SIZE ESTIMATER


    -- Amit


    "There is no 'patch' for stupidity."


    Download the Updated SQL Server 2005 Books Online.

  • May 20, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    #818215

    Hi Amit,

    Thanks a lot ! But when I executed this procedure its displaying 0 kb for clustered_index_size_in_kbytes, I tried for different tables which actually has clustered indexes but for all its displaying the same. Other than this its calculating all other parameters. I would appreciate your clarification.

    Thanks,

    Sam.

  • June 19, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    #1012755

    Hi Amit,

    I used the script on one of my tables it gives me about 600 MB for 400,000 records.

    I filled that table with "actual" data (400,000 records) and It is only 150 MB!

    Note: There were one clustered index (PK) and 4 non-clustered indexes in that table.

    Any explanation for this big different?

    Thanks

  • December 2, 2009 at 4:58 am

    #1086367

    Hossam AlFraih (6/19/2009)

    Hi Amit,

    I used the script on one of my tables it gives me about 600 MB for 400,000 records.

    I filled that table with "actual" data (400,000 records) and It is only 150 MB!

    Note: There were one clustered index (PK) and 4 non-clustered indexes in that table.

    Any explanation for this big different?

    Thanks

    I hope to get a reply very soon.

    Thanks

    Hossam

  • June 10, 2010 at 10:29 am

    #1178745

    Did you enter data that filled all variable length fields completely? Remember: Amit's code estimates the size of the table based on every variable length field being completely filled in. So, if a variable length field is varchar(200), his script will estimate the size based on that field being completely filled with 200 characters versus, let's say, only 10.

    Hossam AlFraih (12/2/2009)

    Hossam AlFraih (6/19/2009)

    Hi Amit,

    I used the script on one of my tables it gives me about 600 MB for 400,000 records.

    I filled that table with "actual" data (400,000 records) and It is only 150 MB!

    Note: There were one clustered index (PK) and 4 non-clustered indexes in that table.

    Any explanation for this big different?

    Thanks

    I hope to get a reply very soon.

    Thanks

    Hossam

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply