Estimating Database Size Issue

All,
I am following the guidelines laid out on the following page to
calculate an estimated size for a database.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178085.aspx.
However, I am noticing something weird. Because
Index_Rows_Per_Page is calculated by dividing the (Index_Row_Size +
2), the MORE variable and non-variable keys you add to your table, the
SMALLER the size of the database gets. Does this make sense to anyone
because it doesn't make sense to me.
Here's my database:
Num_Rows = 75,000,000
Num_Cols = 3
Fixed_Data_Size = 8
Num_Variable_Cols = 0
Max_Var_Size = 0
Num_Key_Cols = 2
Fixed_Key_Size = 4
Num_Variable_Key_Cols = 0
Max_Var_Key_Size = 0
Num_Nullable_Key_Cols = 0
Using this information, I get 438.07GB as the size of my
database.
If I change the number of Fixed_Key_Size to 6, the size of the
database drops to 335.25GB.
Again, this doesn't make sense to me. If quadruple checked my
math against what's in the URL above, and it appears to match what is
in the document. Is Microsoft's calculation wrong? Surely not. Maybe I
missed something? Are you guys getting the same results based off of
my info above?
Thanks,
JeremyI remember when I first read this article I felt pretty overwhelmed.
I've found the many scripts and articles from www.sqlservercentral.com
(and www.sql-server-perfromance.com I think) to be much more
intuitive. I know this doesn't really answer your question, its more
of a suggestion.
Erik|||Thanks Erik. I was looking further through the code I wrote, value by
value, and it turns out that it's either the LOG function or the
Summation function (or a combination of both) that is making the size
decrease when the byte size of indexed keys increases. But it still
doesn't make sense.
I'll take a look at those links though, thanks!
Jeremysql

Estimating Database Size Issue

All,
I am following the guidelines laid out on the following page to
calculate an estimated size for a database.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178085.aspx.
However, I am noticing something weird. Because
Index_Rows_Per_Page is calculated by dividing the (Index_Row_Size +
2), the MORE variable and non-variable keys you add to your table, the
SMALLER the size of the database gets. Does this make sense to anyone
because it doesn't make sense to me.
Here's my database:
Num_Rows = 75,000,000
Num_Cols = 3
Fixed_Data_Size = 8
Num_Variable_Cols = 0
Max_Var_Size = 0
Num_Key_Cols = 2
Fixed_Key_Size = 4
Num_Variable_Key_Cols = 0
Max_Var_Key_Size = 0
Num_Nullable_Key_Cols = 0
Using this information, I get 438.07GB as the size of my
database.
If I change the number of Fixed_Key_Size to 6, the size of the
database drops to 335.25GB.
Again, this doesn't make sense to me. If quadruple checked my
math against what's in the URL above, and it appears to match what is
in the document. Is Microsoft's calculation wrong? Surely not. Maybe I
missed something? Are you guys getting the same results based off of
my info above?
Thanks,
Jeremy
I remember when I first read this article I felt pretty overwhelmed.
I've found the many scripts and articles from www.sqlservercentral.com
(and www.sql-server-perfromance.com I think) to be much more
intuitive. I know this doesn't really answer your question, its more
of a suggestion.
Erik
|||Thanks Erik. I was looking further through the code I wrote, value by
value, and it turns out that it's either the LOG function or the
Summation function (or a combination of both) that is making the size
decrease when the byte size of indexed keys increases. But it still
doesn't make sense.
I'll take a look at those links though, thanks!
Jeremy

Errors on Datasource.aspx page

I have an installation of RS 2000 on a Win 2003 server.
I've started getting an error whenever I access the Data Source pages
using the Report Manager.
The page loads OK. But I cannot make any changes. For example, if I try
to change the "Connect Using" options from "Windows Integrated
Secuirty" to "Credentials stored securely ...", the radio button shows
the selection, but the required text boxes are not enabled, In the
bottom left corener of the IE status bar, "Error on Page" flashes.
The server log files and event logs show nothing regarding the error.
This happens on all Data Source pages on this server.

Any ideas?

It sounds like some of the javascript files are missing. Try reregistering asp.net client files by running aspnet_regiis -c from \windows\microsoft.net\framework\v1.1.4322.

Error: Subreport could not be shown.

I have to print 4 forms one form per page from a datatable generated by
a single query, since on the design window I can see only one page, my
initial solution was to create 4 reports, and they work fine, but the
end user needs to see the 4 forms at once to send it to a pdf.
Now, I created a new report and add the 4 reports as a subreports, but
I am getting the message "Error: Subreport could not be shown. "
I will apreciate any help.
Thank you
GustavoHi,
Just check the right report you have selected from the drop down for sub
reportand most importantly all the parameters are selected propely. I doubt
it should be some missing parameters.
Amarnath.
"gvt99@.hotmail.com" wrote:
> I have to print 4 forms one form per page from a datatable generated by
> a single query, since on the design window I can see only one page, my
> initial solution was to create 4 reports, and they work fine, but the
> end user needs to see the 4 forms at once to send it to a pdf.
> Now, I created a new report and add the 4 reports as a subreports, but
> I am getting the message "Error: Subreport could not be shown. "
> I will apreciate any help.
> Thank you
> Gustavo
>|||Gustavo,
You are probably missing some parameters. You must supply the
subreports with parameters from the Master report.
Also, Amarnath, dont forget that if the report has temp tables, it will
not automatically fill those parameters.
regards,
Stas K.