 |
 |
Archives of the TeradataForum
Message Posted: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 @ 09:46:49 GMT
| Subj: | | Re: Length of timestamp |
| |
| From: | | Dieter Noeth |
Anomy.Anom wrote:
| | We are trying to estimate volumetrics for a new application and I really need to understand how much physical disk space a Timestamp(0)
datatype will consume. Dieter's comments pasted below leave me a little confused. I think what you are saying is that the columnlength column
indicates the "logical" presentation of the timestamp value, e.g. Timestamp(0) = 19 but physical internal storage only consumes 10 bytes. | |
Yep
| | What I don't understand is why other column datatypes like Smallint, Integer and Date have their "physical" column length displayed
in the columnlength column | |
You probably have to ask the developers...
| | I created a test table (shown below) with a few different datatypes for each column and then checked their columnlength values in
DBC.Columns. It appears that the numeric datatypes display their "physical" length and the non-numeric datatypes display their "logical" length.
Is my assumption correct? And if so, how do I determine/prove what it costs to store a Timestamp(0) datatype? | |
All that information is found within the manuals:
Database Design
Chapter 15: Database-Level Capacity Planning Considerations
including formulas for sizing tables, etc.
Dieter
| |
