If this turns out to be gigs, I'm going to cry. I was terribly excited about an 800TB system.

Stefan_G (4/29/2010)

---

Paul White NZ (4/28/2010)

---

kinzent (4/28/2010)

---

You say "The fact is that data is neither stored nor retreived in precise order" , but when there is a clustered index on one...

I didn't say it "can't" be 100tb, I said it probably shouldn't be. You can have a tlog hundreds of times the size of your database, but that doesn't make...

Jeff, or anyone else that knows a heck of a lot more about decimals than I do, please go check this question on Ask.SQLServerCentral. I really don't have a clue,...

You will need to upgrade that license.

Guys, go and check this out. Either we have a measuring error or this guy is dealing with the single largest SQL Server installation I've heard about.

He's backing up a...

You're doing a 100TB log backup in 50 seconds? That's simply amazing right there.

But the question I have is, with an 800TB database (which is about 800 times the...

Presumably, with an index on the column and the LIKE operator only have a wild card at the end of the string, you have a sargeable (search argument able) query....

No, waits are not because of inadequate storage. It's because either the network, or the storage system itself, is running slow and causing SQL Server to wait on it. Most...

First thing I noticed is that you have two table scans, not clustered index scans. Unless you have a very good reason, most tables should have a clustered index. I'd...

This is only an issue if SQL Server is sharing that system with other applications. If it is, you're probably going to hit issues because, to put it mildly, SQL...

True, but since it's usually run within...

Late getting back in, but Paul answered the questions same way I would have, only better.

It was answered over there.

Yep. Just 2010. Kind of...