We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

Check out our new AWS podcast with Certified Expert, Phil Phillips! Listen to "How to Execute a Seamless AWS Migration" on EE or on your favorite podcast platform. Listen Now


SqlServer2008 & DDBB múltiple

Medium Priority
Last Modified: 2012-05-11
Hemos creado una aplicación Web basada en muchos usuarios pequeños y para cada usuario individual cream,os una nueva DDBB en un SqkServer2008. Ahora, presuntos expertos en Sql nos dicen que está mal enfocado. ¿Porqué sería correcto tener una sola DDBB con el nº de cliente en cada registro de cada archivo y no es correcto tener miles de DDBB con todos los ficheros y registros sin el nº de cliente?. Ejemplo: DDBB name: 000000001 con el fichero XXX con los campos A, B y C. Select A,B,C from XXX de la DDBB 000000001 en lugar de Select A,B,C,D from XXX where D='000000001'. Dajando aparte el tema de la ocupación en bites del resultado.
Watch Question

Distinguished Expert 2019


Unfortunately, my spanish is not that good, but spanishdict.com has a good translator. The problem with your post is that it is not clear what the issue is. If you do not have an identity column, this makes it difficult to normalize data to have maximum information with minimal space usage.
English to spanish translation
Desgraciadamente, mi español no es muy bueno, pero spanishdict.com tiene un buen traductor. El problema con su mensaje es que no está claro cuál es el problema. Si usted no tiene una columna de identidad, esto hace que sea difícil normalizar los datos para tener la máxima información con el uso de un espacio mínimo.
Translation from spanishdict.com
We have created a web application based on many small users and individual users cream, a new DDBB you a SqkServer2008. Now, alleged experts tell us that Sql is misplaced. Why would one DDBB right to have the customer number in each record of each file and it is wrong to have thousands of DDBB with all the files and records without the customer number?. Example: DDBB name: 000000001 XXX file with the fields A, B and C. Select A, B, C from the DDBB 000000001 XXX instead of Select A, B, C, D from D WHERE XXX = '000000001 '. Dajando aside the issue of occupancy bit of the result.

Open in new window


The application runs perfectly with: hundreds of DDBB named GWS000000001, GWS000000002, GWS000000003... Each user are one DDBB with the numbner of customer. We do sql like: select * from filename with string connection directed to DDBB GWS000000NNN and this run perfectly. But "the experts" say when we have thousandas of  DDBB that falls on the SqlServer performance.
This is right>?
We think that sqlserver lets you manage many DDBB as requested.
Distinguished Expert 2019
Unlock this solution and get a sample of our free trial.
(No credit card required)


More opinions please?


Thenk you
Unlock the solution to this question.
Thanks for using Experts Exchange.

Please provide your email to receive a sample view!

*This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


Please enter a first name

Please enter a last name

8+ characters (letters, numbers, and a symbol)

By clicking, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.