View Single Post
Old 07-14-2017, 09:24 AM   #30302
fum
Zealot
fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.fum ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 120
Karma: 728454
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Device: PWII
Probably. :-)
But the thinking behind is sound, I think: What is the best way to preserve data in a way that it possible can be read in 100 years? In a stupid .txt file, wrapped with some xml. It is based on the 'SIARD' standard. (Software Independent Archiving of Relational Databases). But when you have a table with 17 million rows, 44 columns, you get a .xml file with 17 * 44 million lines. + some overhead. I have a file from another table, that is like this, but only with 13 million rows. That one is 25GB. So I think this one will nearing the 30gb, when sql-server is finished writing it, in a couple of days. :-)
fum is offline   Reply With Quote