THE SQL Server Blog Spot on the Web

Welcome to - The SQL Server blog spot on the web Sign in | |
in Search

James Luetkehoelter

Nearly any SQL topic presented at times in a slightly eclectic manner.

Survey: How much data do you work with?

Andy isn't the only one that can ask a survey question. This is something I really curious about because many of the answers or recommendations or rants in blogs are not universably applicable to every database - small databases must sometimes be treated differently, and uber databases are just a pain (and fun at the same time).

So, how would you classify most of the databases you work with:

1) Up to 50GB

2) 50-500GB

3) 500GB - 2TB


Published Wednesday, March 10, 2010 12:57 PM by James Luetkehoelter



Denis Gobo said:

Most of them are between 50-500GB

I also deal with category 4 (OMG Size)

the ones I use most are between 500GB - 2TB and these are OLAP DBs

Of course I also deal with the up to 50GB but they are becoming rare

March 10, 2010 1:56 PM

Robert L Davis said:

I guess the answer would be 4 since I have several database in the 7 to 10 TB range.

March 10, 2010 1:58 PM

hainbloed said:

I work with nearly 300 instance on over 200 servers. Most databases are under 100 GB. But some are real hugh. For example our Sharepoint has over 2 TB content databases-

March 10, 2010 2:11 PM

Sankar Reddy said:

several #1, couple of #2 and one #3

March 10, 2010 2:22 PM

DonRWatters said:

5)  Greater than 100TB per DB

March 10, 2010 2:30 PM

Denny Cherry said:

Our databases fall into the 1 and 3 range.  They are basically pretty small (few hundred megs) or 1 TB in size.

March 10, 2010 2:41 PM

Jack Corbett said:

At my current position it's about 50/50 between 2 and 3.  At my last position it was about the same as well.  Never worked with any 4's

March 10, 2010 2:51 PM

Jack Corbett said:

Ignore my last comment.  I misread the #'s.  Mine are all currently 1's  I read MB where it was GB.

March 10, 2010 2:57 PM

Zack Jones said:

1 and I thought we had reached the big time when one of our tables went over 1 million records in it. In reality our databases are very small compared to others that have replied.

March 10, 2010 4:00 PM

Mateus said:

up to 50GB

March 10, 2010 5:02 PM

James Luetkehoelter said:

OK Don, no changing my categories :)

But seriously, that OMG category should probably be "do you measure your database in terms of petabytes?"

March 10, 2010 5:30 PM

Uri Dimant said:

Hi James

Currently I am working with 2-3 range size.

March 11, 2010 1:45 AM

merrillaldrich said:

Small databases (1 & 2) numbering in the hundreds, and one bigger warehouse (2 TB)

March 11, 2010 8:22 AM

Adam Machanic said:

Mostly in the 2+ TB range. But certainly not in the 100 TB range! Would love to hear more information from DonRWatters about what kinds of databases he's working on.

March 11, 2010 9:42 AM

James Luetkehoelter said:

Agree Adam - Don, tell us more!

Biggest I've worked with is 750TB, usually it ranges from the 20GB to 2-4TB.

March 11, 2010 9:55 AM

Adam Machanic said:

James, 750 TB?? Maybe it's you who needs to tell us more.

March 11, 2010 10:12 AM

James Luetkehoelter said:

OK, the 750TB one was deceivingly large. It was a huge mixture of large financial tables which took up maybe 50-60TB. The rest of it included some useful information, but a LOT of BLOB data. A LOT. I mean A LOT. Still from a raw DBA standpoint it was a pain to deal with. That's when my love affair with filegroups began....

March 11, 2010 10:19 AM

TheCosmicTrickster said:

Mostly 1 with a couple of 2.  Most of the 1s are less than 10GB.

March 11, 2010 6:48 PM

Michael Zilberstein said:

Mostly #1, couple of #3 and one of #4.

March 14, 2010 4:21 PM

Neil Hambly said:

Mine are usually in the S-M sizes mostly 2) 50-500GB range, do have couple of DB's with individual TABLES ~700GB each (No BLOB data), those can be fun @ times .. but nothing too large (thankfully)

Intresting to know also what Editions these larger DB are using.

I'm using x64 Std 2005 SP3 mostly (no EE as yet)..I plan to go to 2008 R2 (x64)soon, compression would help shrink these down some (but that needs EE)

April 7, 2010 9:00 AM

andrew said:

I think if you added a choice below 1, like 0-5GB, it would be shocking how many people fall into that range as you go wider in the survey. I'm really glad to see so many working with VLDBs and I'm eager to find more resources that drill down on VLDB operations and maintenance.

The relative number of posts online that have relevant information for the VLDB DBA is unfortunately small, and most of the commentary seems to be hypothetical rather than experiential(?) or practical.

December 4, 2011 2:20 AM
New Comments to this post are disabled

About James Luetkehoelter

I am passionate about what I do - which is DBA, development, IT and IT business consulting. If you don't know me, haven't met me or have never heard me speak, I'm a little on the eccentric side. One attendee recently described me as being "over the top". Yup, that about says it - because I only speak on topics that I'm passionate about.
Privacy Statement