Database size in SQL Server 2012

  • Comments posted to this topic are about the item Database size in SQL Server 2012

    Thanks

  • If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32 and that have a limit to 4GB/file. The 524,272TB limit is based on 32,767 * 16TB files. Since FAT32 cant hold a 16TB file the maximum limit on a FAT32 system would be 131068GB. (4GB-1B*32767)

    PS Not the answer i chose... i justed picked an answer at random since my own answer would be "More then i will ever need, so who cares" 😀

    /T

  • tommyh (6/19/2012)


    If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32 and that have a limit to 4GB/file. The 524,272TB limit is based on 32,767 * 16TB files. Since FAT32 cant hold a 16TB file the maximum limit on a FAT32 system would be 131068GB. (4GB-1B*32767)

    PS Not the answer i chose... i justed picked an answer at random since my own answer would be "More then i will ever need, so who cares" 😀

    /T

    Agree with Tommy here.

    Need an answer? No, you need a question
    My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
    MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

  • tommyh (6/19/2012)


    If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32 and that have a limit to 4GB/file. The 524,272TB limit is based on 32,767 * 16TB files. Since FAT32 cant hold a 16TB file the maximum limit on a FAT32 system would be 131068GB. (4GB-1B*32767)

    PS Not the answer i chose... i justed picked an answer at random since my own answer would be "More then i will ever need, so who cares" 😀

    /T

    I agree with your remarks, but I think the word 'maximum' eliminates all doubts. If there is a 128bit machine, then the maximum possible address space would be 2^64 * 524,272TB which SQL Server 2012 does not support it right now, so 524,272TB is the-no-doubt answer.

    Regards

    IgorMi

    Igor Micev,
    My blog: www.igormicev.com

  • Thanks for answering..

    Thanks

  • tommyh (6/19/2012)


    If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32

    /T

    Is FAT32 still alive?

    FAT32 is deprecated because of non transactionl writes as storage of database files.

  • Would that be 511 PB or 524 PB?

    Googling...

    1 PB = 1000000000000000B = 10005 B = 1015 B = 1 million gigabytes = 1 thousand terabytes

    So if the correct answer is 524 000 odd TB it's the equivalent of 511 PB.

    Michael Gilchrist
    Database Specialist
    There are 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those that don't. 😀

  • Michael G (6/20/2012)


    Would that be 511 PB or 524 PB?

    Googling...

    1 PB = 1000000000000000B = 10005 B = 1015 B = 1 million gigabytes = 1 thousand terabytes

    So if the correct answer is 524 000 odd TB it's the equivalent of 511 PB.

    524,272 TB = 524,272 * 1000000000000 bytes = 524.272 Petabytes

    The scale of kilo - mega - giga - terra - peta is always a multiplication of 1000.

    So it goes like 10^0, 10^3, 10^6, 10^9 and so on.

    kibi - mebi - gibi - tebi - pebi is a multiplication of 1024 or 2^10.

    That goes like 2^0, 2^10, 2^20 and so on.

    Need an answer? No, you need a question
    My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
    MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

  • This was removed by the editor as SPAM

  • Carlo Romagnano (6/20/2012)


    tommyh (6/19/2012)


    If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32

    /T

    Is FAT32 still alive?

    FAT32 is deprecated because of non transactionl writes as storage of database files.

    Is FAT32 alive? Well thats a matter of perspective. You can still format disks with it (atleast in Win2008R2). So its possible. And since its possible the answer lands in the "Depends" category.

    And the requirements for SQL2012 doesnt mention deprecated just that it isnt recommended.

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143506.aspx

    But no sane person would willingly install SQL on a computer with FAT32 (atleast not today). Personally i wouldnt use FAT32 for anything today.

    /T

  • Nice question, however, I must admit, the first answer that came to me was "Depends upon the file system."

    Thanks & Regards,
    Nakul Vachhrajani.
    http://nakulvachhrajani.com
    Be courteous. Drive responsibly.

    Follow me on
    Twitter: @sqltwins

  • I'm not sure if I agree with those saying that 'Depends on file system' is correct. Of course file systems have hard limits, so do hard drives and SANs but these factors do not stop you having a larger database. If the documentation said that under a particular file system the database can only be so big and listed numbers less than the file system limits then there may be a case.

  • tommyh (6/19/2012)


    If one wants be really picky "Depends on File System" is actually the right answer.

    You can install 2012 on FAT32 and that have a limit to 4GB/file. The 524,272TB limit is based on 32,767 * 16TB files. Since FAT32 cant hold a 16TB file the maximum limit on a FAT32 system would be 131068GB. (4GB-1B*32767)

    Yeah, by that logic it also depends on the size of the installed disk. On my laptop, the maximum size is 348 GB (unless I clean out some old files first).

    But that does not make it the maximum database size. I can attach more and bigger disks and go beyond 348 GB. And so can the poor soul who currently is using FAT32 - they only need to attach a new file system and move the database files to that file system, and then they can grow the files to 16 TB each.

    EDIT: Got distracted while composing my reply, and then I didn't see that call.copse had already posted a similar comment.


    Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server/Data Platform MVP (2006-2016)
    Visit my SQL Server blog: https://sqlserverfast.com/blog/
    SQL Server Execution Plan Reference: https://sqlserverfast.com/epr/

  • Koen Verbeeck (6/20/2012)

    kibi - mebi - gibi - tebi - pebi is a multiplication of 1024 or 2^10.

    That goes like 2^0, 2^10, 2^20 and so on.

    And those are the numbers the SQL data limits are based on--when it says 16 petabytes for a single file, it means that in the binary meaning. Let's face it, nobody outside of hard disk manufacturers insists on using all this kibibyte nonsense; a kilobyte has always been 1024 bytes as far as I'm concerned.

  • paul.knibbs (6/20/2012)


    a kilobyte has always been 1024 bytes as far as I'm concerned.

    For me, a kilobyte is still 1000 bytes. kilo = 1000

    Need an answer? No, you need a question
    My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
    MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)

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