﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>Karen Lopez: Musings on Data, Process, and Architecture </title>
    <description>Insights and thoughts about data and IT-related concepts.</description>
    <link>http://www.infoadvisors.com/Home/tabid/36/BlogId/1/Default.aspx</link>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <managingEditor>Karen Lopez - listmistress@Infoadvisors.com</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>karen@Infoadvisors.com</webMaster>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 22:30:28 GMT</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 22:30:28 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
    <generator>Blog RSS Generator Version 3.4.0.39853</generator>
    <item>
      <title>Effects of Denormalization on DB Performance</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;An anonymous blogger has started writinga series of posts of his experiments with database design and performance.  His profile describes him as "A Seattle database guy who works at start ups."&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;In the last article the performance impact of joins was shown.  This one will demonstrate cases where denormalized joins are a bit faster, as will the third article with larger data volumes.  The fourth article, the most interesting one, will show where a denormalized data model can be 50 times faster than a normalized data model. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Here are the tables that will be involved in the sql.  The normalized ProductSmall table has a 100 million rows and is about 0.67 gig. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What I appreciate about his posts is the fact that he is supporting his positions with actual tests.  So far his two blog posts have focused on very large tables (more than a million rows) and the impact of memory usage.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I'd also like to see him post about working with smaller data volumes.  For instance, I work at times with new developers who tell me that our database or table is "very large" at 4,000 rows and needs a great deal of denormalization for performance reasons.  I usually ask them to run tests similar to what the DBScience guy is doing to show me all the great benefits of combining 6 tables into one table with a total of 10,000 rows.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Check out his blog as he adds articles. http://dbscience.blogspot.com/&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.infoadvisors.com/Home/tabid/36/EntryID/148/Default.aspx</link>
      <author>Karen Lopez - listmistress@Infoadvisors.com</author>
      <comments>http://www.infoadvisors.com/Home/tabid/36/EntryID/148/Default.aspx#Comments</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.infoadvisors.com/Default.aspx?tabid=36&amp;EntryID=148</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:03:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.infoadvisors.com/DesktopModules/Blog/Trackback.aspx?id=148</trackback:ping>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>