5 ms·
223 million rows in 38MB would mean less than a fifth of a byte per row. Is your data really that extremely repetetive?
by eis 12y ago
223 million rows in 38MB would mean less than a fifth of a byte per row. Is your data really that extremely repetetive?
- NamTaf 12y agoPhenomenal. Some is binary (sparse, too - 99% false sort of thing), one other is an integer from -1 to 8, some are floats (decimal degrees for GPS) and one is a datetime. 38MB is what is reported when I use the following query, which I found somewhere: SELECT table_schema, sum (data_length + index_length) / 1024 / 1024 'Data Base Size in MB', TABLE_COMMENT FROM information_schema.TABLES GROUP BY table_schema You're right though - the cost per row sounds really low, I might try to find it via other means tomorrow and report back.
- NamTaf 12y agoYup, just confirmed that the raw folder size of the database is 39.8MB and reports 39MB (not 38) in my query. It is also 222.78M rows. Note that you need to remove the space between the sum and the bracket if you want to run that query. I can only assume that IB does some sort of differential compression on the data to get such a small filesize on that data and that it's an artifact of the machine data I'm using. But that's what I think the next big wave of data will be - stuff generated by data loggers on machines and equipment and analysed to scrape out incremental improvements on efficiency, reliability, etc. from previously relatively low-tech industrial corporations.