<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: X records with n fields versus 1 record with (n + X) fields in QlikView</title>
    <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496706#M481974</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Performance depends on both the number of records and the number of fields.&amp;nbsp; I would not recommend a fact table with 10 million rows, but 300 fields.&amp;nbsp; I've even seen a case where having 600 fields caused a weird error in QlikView.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The worst performance results have occurred when the model contains 2 tables with a large number of records and fields.&amp;nbsp; For this reason I stopped using link tables long ago, but your question is a good one.&amp;nbsp; I don't know what has more effect on performance: a large number of fields or a large number of columns.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Look forward to the results.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Karl&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 08 Sep 2013 23:16:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator />
    <dc:date>2013-09-08T23:16:07Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>X records with n fields versus 1 record with (n + X) fields</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496705#M481973</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For a model that I am building, I am trying to evaluate which is the optimal way to go forward.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I need to create for each record to be analysed a set of parameters.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So basically, &lt;STRONG&gt;table size + performance&lt;/STRONG&gt; as always are of key interest.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Intuitively, I lean for 1 record with (n + X) fields, with a key that links it back to my Fact table.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Before I start simulating in order to assess the impact, does anyone &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- have a thought on the matter?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- identify additional key interest areas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;These parameters will be :&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0 - generated in the load script&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1 - calculated based on the 10 fields (or a combination) that are given&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 - used to generate additional parameters in the record&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kind regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Antoine&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Sep 2013 18:58:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496705#M481973</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-09-08T18:58:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: X records with n fields versus 1 record with (n + X) fields</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496706#M481974</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Performance depends on both the number of records and the number of fields.&amp;nbsp; I would not recommend a fact table with 10 million rows, but 300 fields.&amp;nbsp; I've even seen a case where having 600 fields caused a weird error in QlikView.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The worst performance results have occurred when the model contains 2 tables with a large number of records and fields.&amp;nbsp; For this reason I stopped using link tables long ago, but your question is a good one.&amp;nbsp; I don't know what has more effect on performance: a large number of fields or a large number of columns.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Look forward to the results.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Karl&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Sep 2013 23:16:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496706#M481974</guid>
      <dc:creator />
      <dc:date>2013-09-08T23:16:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: X records with n fields versus 1 record with (n + X) fields</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496707#M481975</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I managed to split the problem in half.&lt;BR /&gt;I generated the minimum required records and the minimum required fields.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;When I went to full blast (i.e. all records) I generated out of 30k 16 mio with a size of 150 MB.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Execution time 11 min.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When I divided the problem, I kept a 500K records with additional 23 fields.&amp;nbsp; Size 6MB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Execution time less than a minute.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now for the next part of the riddle, which is how to automate the creation of the 23 fields.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A _jive_internal="true" href="https://community.qlik.com/thread/92181"&gt;http://community.qlik.com/thread/92181&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:06:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/X-records-with-n-fields-versus-1-record-with-n-X-fields/m-p/496707#M481975</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-09-16T16:06:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

