Post reply

Cannot create a row of size XXXX which is greater than the allowable maximum row size of 8060

  • July 31, 2019 at 5:10 pm

    #3667648

    ScottPletcher wrote:

    Then again, with properly normalized tables, I can't imagine ever needing more than 10 (if that many?) max-length columns in one row.

    I cannot give that comment enough good points!  Absolutely and totally agreed!

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • July 31, 2019 at 8:19 pm

    #3667692

    ScottPletcher wrote:

    Agreed.  Be nice if MS added the option to the CREATE TABLE statement, so that SQL would "know" that the variable length bytes are not needed at all for the forced-off-row columns, something like:

    CREATE TABLE ... ( ... ) WITH ( LARGE_VALUE_TYPES_OUT_OF_ROW = ON );

    What would be even nicer is if MS hadn't reversed the defaults to begin with (defaults on the old LOB datatypes was "out of row").  I don't know who came up with the dim idea of defaulting LOBs to "In row (if it fits)".

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

Viewing 2 posts - 16 through 16 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply