Randall Moore

[speed and tables]

I am in the planning stages of a website and want to design my database to allow for optimum performance in case the site becomes popular. In my database I will have around 5 main categories with each category having around 25 or 30 subcategories and each subcategory having around 100 to 200 items. I plan to use MS-SQL Server. Would it be best to have one large table or have 5 tables for the main categories or have around 100 tables one for each subcategory? Database usage will be simple (no complex queries) but most pages will hit the database and I need to allow for a potential of 4 or 5 million page views per month.

Randall

[Frank]

My non-qualified vote is ONE single table becasue you do not have to open a connection so many times plus Joining is very expensive. BUT, I woul dlike to cut and paste this question and goto the SQL forum next dorr and drop it there. The guru there will give a qualified answer. If you do not get any, send the question to the webmaster Steve Wynkoop. He published many SQL books. But look at my web site for some performance benchmark using ASPdb. SQL seemed to be the winner.


Frank



------------
speed and tables at 12/11/99 4:56:14 PM

I am in the planning stages of a website and want to design my database to allow for optimum performance in case the site becomes popular. In my database I will have around 5 main categories with each category having around 25 or 30 subcategories and each subcategory having around 100 to 200 items. I plan to use MS-SQL Server. Would it be best to have one large table or have 5 tables for the main categories or have around 100 tables one for each subcategory? Database usage will be simple (no complex queries) but most pages will hit the database and I need to allow for a potential of 4 or 5 million page views per month.

Randall