MCDBA Certification!

Hi all,
I am looking at doing the MCDBA certification.
Does any one have any training guides they suggest?
Web links or resources that might help?
General tips?
Is 2005 certification avialable yet?
Cheers,
AdamThe 2005 track is a little different. You may want to start here:
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcts/sql/
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Adam J Knight" <adam.jknight@.optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:uzWsAJ7%23FHA.504@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am looking at doing the MCDBA certification.
> Does any one have any training guides they suggest?
> Web links or resources that might help?
> General tips?
> Is 2005 certification avialable yet?
> Cheers,
> Adam
>sql

Maximum FT Catalogs per server

Hello, I am trying to see what the limit is on creating FT catalogs per
server. I have found 2 Non MS links stating 256 catalogs per server, but I
really need to confirm this.
Thanks for your help
Hello henderson,
After 7 minutes I'm at 1700 catalogs, so I guess the 256 is not true. This
is on a Sql2005 server (my laptop)
If you want to see the limit try this
declare @.name varchar(100)
declare @.i int
set @.i = 0
while @.i < 10000
begin
set @.name = 'catalog' + cast(@.i as varchar(10))
exec ('create fulltext catalog ' + @.name )
set @.i = @.i + 1
end
Simon Sabin
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons

> Hello, I am trying to see what the limit is on creating FT catalogs
> per server. I have found 2 Non MS links stating 256 catalogs per
> server, but I really need to confirm this.
> Thanks for your help
>
|||Simon,
The 256 FT Catalog limit is specifc to SQL Server 7.0 and SQL Server
2000 and not a limiting factor in SQL Server 2005. Note, many FTS
issues are SQL Server and OS-platform specific. I've long known about
this limit and while there are to the best of my knowledge no specific
KB article from Microsoft on this limit, I have found the following
quotes and links on Microsoft.com and Support.Microsoft.com:
There is a hard limit of 256 search catalogs per server;
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...mspx?mfr=true
However, I find the below quote in the offical Microsoft SQL Support
white paper on deploying FTS using SQL Server 2000:
"You can create a maximum of 256 full-text catalogs on each server."
SQL Server 2000 Full-Text Search Deployment white paper
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/323739
Thanks,
John
SQL Full Text Search Blog
http://jtkane.spaces.live.com/
Simon Sabin wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello henderson,
> After 7 minutes I'm at 1700 catalogs, so I guess the 256 is not true. This
> is on a Sql2005 server (my laptop)
> If you want to see the limit try this
> declare @.name varchar(100)
> declare @.i int
> set @.i = 0
> while @.i < 10000
> begin
> set @.name = 'catalog' + cast(@.i as varchar(10))
> exec ('create fulltext catalog ' + @.name )
> set @.i = @.i + 1
> end
>
> Simon Sabin
> SQL Server MVP
> http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons
>
|||Thank you both for your help in this. I should have clarified that I am using
sql server 2000. Anyway. Thanks again. It is really appreaciated!!!!!
"jtkane@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Simon,
> The 256 FT Catalog limit is specifc to SQL Server 7.0 and SQL Server
> 2000 and not a limiting factor in SQL Server 2005. Note, many FTS
> issues are SQL Server and OS-platform specific. I've long known about
> this limit and while there are to the best of my knowledge no specific
> KB article from Microsoft on this limit, I have found the following
> quotes and links on Microsoft.com and Support.Microsoft.com:
> There is a hard limit of 256 search catalogs per server;
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...mspx?mfr=true
> However, I find the below quote in the offical Microsoft SQL Support
> white paper on deploying FTS using SQL Server 2000:
> "You can create a maximum of 256 full-text catalogs on each server."
> SQL Server 2000 Full-Text Search Deployment white paper
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/323739
> Thanks,
> John
> SQL Full Text Search Blog
> http://jtkane.spaces.live.com/
>
> Simon Sabin wrote:
>

Max width for indexed column?

Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
Thanks for your advice.
- Joe Geretz -
'bad' is of course a relative term...
Yes, width of an index will affect performance. This is a LONG topic, but
here a a few thoughts...
* width of a clustered index can be more important to worry about than a NC
index since a clustered index key is propogated through ALL the NC indexex.
* yes, width does matter. Intuitively, it just makes sense. There is less
CPU and much less IO involved for a 10 byte index than a 100 byte index.
Would it be quicker for you to read a list of 10 letter words or 100 letter
sentences? Of course that's a silly example, but yes... narrow indexes will
be better all things considered.
* having a wide index isn't the end of hte world and probably isn't a big
deal with smaller data sets.
* if you DO need to index wide char based fields and you are worred about
performance... you may want to consider creating a checksum based on the
chat column and indexing the checsum col (which will be an integer). That
would be much faster...
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:e7LEw0RiEHA.344@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
> VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
> Thanks for your advice.
> - Joe Geretz -
>

Max width for indexed column?

Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
Thanks for your advice.
- Joe Geretz -'bad' is of course a relative term...
Yes, width of an index will affect performance. This is a LONG topic, but
here a a few thoughts...
* width of a clustered index can be more important to worry about than a NC
index since a clustered index key is propogated through ALL the NC indexex.
* yes, width does matter. Intuitively, it just makes sense. There is less
CPU and much less IO involved for a 10 byte index than a 100 byte index.
Would it be quicker for you to read a list of 10 letter words or 100 letter
sentences? Of course that's a silly example, but yes... narrow indexes will
be better all things considered.
* having a wide index isn't the end of hte world and probably isn't a big
deal with smaller data sets.
* if you DO need to index wide char based fields and you are worred about
performance... you may want to consider creating a checksum based on the
chat column and indexing the checsum col (which will be an integer). That
would be much faster...
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:e7LEw0RiEHA.344@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
> VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
> Thanks for your advice.
> - Joe Geretz -
>

Max width for indexed column?

Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
Thanks for your advice.
- Joe Geretz -'bad' is of course a relative term...
Yes, width of an index will affect performance. This is a LONG topic, but
here a a few thoughts...
* width of a clustered index can be more important to worry about than a NC
index since a clustered index key is propogated through ALL the NC indexex.
* yes, width does matter. Intuitively, it just makes sense. There is less
CPU and much less IO involved for a 10 byte index than a 100 byte index.
Would it be quicker for you to read a list of 10 letter words or 100 letter
sentences? Of course that's a silly example, but yes... narrow indexes will
be better all things considered.
* having a wide index isn't the end of hte world and probably isn't a big
deal with smaller data sets.
* if you DO need to index wide char based fields and you are worred about
performance... you may want to consider creating a checksum based on the
chat column and indexing the checsum col (which will be an integer). That
would be much faster...
--
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:e7LEw0RiEHA.344@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is column width a factor for an indexed column? Would indexing a
> VARCHAR(100) be a bad idea? Any links to discussion of this topic?
> Thanks for your advice.
> - Joe Geretz -
>