Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
mikebird
Aged Yak Warrior
529 Posts |
 Posted - 2013-05-08 : 10:01:54
|
| affect systems? More RAM & disk? I see PK, FK and more foreign keys in each table (de-normalisation?) How about a fact table for all GUIDs, and all other dim / ref tables just use that to join, and other indexes are smallints?How much does encryption should be necessary? How would a datacenter database be prone to risk, if all FKs were just smallints? |
|
|
Bustaz Kool
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1834 Posts |
Posted - 2013-05-09 : 16:14:22
|
| The use of smallints is limited by the number of entries in your data. If you have more than 64K entries, smallints are a non-starter. Since you mentioned that you are in a "datacenter", I suspect that your tables are larger than this. It sounds like, though you have not said so explicitly, that your current schema uses GUIDs as unique (primary?) keys and they are used as the basis for foreign keys. A case can be made that using GUIDs in this way is less than ideal. They are wider than an int or smallint which would impact their use in indexes. How many entries do you have in your tables?=================================================There are two kinds of light -- the glow that illuminates, and the glare that obscures. -James Thurber |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
How much do encrypted GUIDs