b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Photoshop Ducks » Message 4219537

[challenge entry] .

From the Photoshop Ducks challenge. See all 515 entries (closed)

(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:14, archived)
# *hits self for laughing*
woo!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:15, archived)
# pfffft
*Belms*
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:16, archived)
# Mmmmgh mmmmngh mmmmnnnnnggghhh

(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:17, archived)
# hahahahaha
joey duckon

incidentally, does anyone know how many collumns a mysql table can have before performance starts to drop noticably? google's feeling somewhat unhelpful... i've only ever used ~10 but the one i'm designing could end up with a few dozen
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:17, archived)
# 25.6
if i remember correctly
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:24, archived)
# 25.7 Shirley...
(I think you forgot the MZ sequential principle)


(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:41, archived)
# Depends
how often the table's going to be hit, I suppose. Send over your schema and I'll take a look, if you like..

paul at reevo dot com.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:30, archived)
# i havn't really drawn one up yet...
i'm trying to work out whether to split it up into a few tables to make it easier to understand... or a single table to make it easier to write queries for
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:32, archived)
# that all depends
on all sorts of things like row lengths, the query you are running and the way the wind is blowing.

But you should be able to create indexes on the heavier tables to reduce the impact

*Removes DBA hat*
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:31, archived)
# oh well... i'll give it a go, most of the columns will be storing boolean values
and there will only be a couple with any sizable amount of data in...
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:36, archived)
# the storage for a boolean in mysql is actually 2048K

*lies through teeth*
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:43, archived)
# hahahahaha
you <sub>ed that enough that i nearly didn't notice it
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:46, archived)
# well if it's mostly boolean
then you should be fine for hundreds probably even thousands of rows.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:46, archived)
# grand stuff...
*prepares unnesecarily long select statements*
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:49, archived)
# rows or columns...?!
don`t do thousands of columns (fields man... use the correct term!), whether or not the database supports it
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:55, archived)
# arse
i did actually mean rows, thousands of fields (thanks for the correction) would be hideous to use.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 12:04, archived)
# Technically attributes
and tuples instead of rows

/splitting hairs
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 12:07, archived)
# One of the user tables we're using
has ~30 fields and ~1500 rows.
In fact, phpMyAdmin can't handle it and keeps locking up on it, but the actual underlying code runs fine!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:34, archived)
# well this one will probably end up somewhere around 30 rows
and if i actually get around to populating it then it should have anywhere from 100-1000 rows... i'll try it and if it borks then i'll break it up a bit
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:38, archived)
# just normalise it and stop being such a relational wuss
:p
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:39, archived)
# pah... i'm not a database person... they're far too organised
i'm still slightly miffed that i'm expected to use postgres for all my DB work this year... i like the unscariness of mysql
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:42, archived)
# there`s not a moleste difference actually; just slightly different syntaxsisisisisisis
plus postgres supports err triggers and stuff from what I remember (which ain`t much.. mysql all the way for me .. and oracle)
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:44, archived)
# It's still scary
to me
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:49, archived)
# *coughdb2cough"
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:54, archived)
# dBase IV
pronounced "dee basssssss" by my old database teacher - the same bloke who looked like Frank Drebin, and who pronounced MS-DOS as "emm ess doooooooooooos"

"- don`t forget to do your regular [backup] dumps"
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:56, archived)
# BCNF
For the win!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:46, archived)
# Normalisation as a general rule
actually impacts performance on a database as the RDBMS has to process the joins, access extra tables etc etc.

It does very well at reducing the amount of storage used overall in the DB though.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:49, archived)
# i can't even understand this
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:50, archived)
# i start to lose the plot
after second normal form and give up.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:53, archived)
# definitely
and a lot of normalisation is actually just common sense; relating stuff together and linking where appropriate - it works nicely with OO programming as you`re using the same approach there
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:57, archived)
# oh definitely - that`s why indexes were created ;)
but if you`re writing object oriented code with object persistence layers, it makes no sense at all not to normalise as the data drives the design of data transfer objects and the like

I say screw the database and have one moleste XML file!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:54, archived)
# fair enough
not really had much exposure to the OO gubbins, purely dba me.

p.s. Gotta love the word filter at the moment
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:59, archived)
# pfft
Real men use mysql via the command prompt :P
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:47, archived)
# I hear ya bro!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:58, archived)
# *chokes*
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:18, archived)
# woot
for mentalists ahahahha
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:20, archived)
# Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Joey!

(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:20, archived)
# I love this
I really do.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:27, archived)
# I am quite pleased with that as a 'woo'.
Joey is one of the enduring images from school, and still one of the funniest insults if done late at night down the pub when nobody is expecting it.


Need to work out how to do a Stig of the dump one. everyone always got called a Joey, or a Stig at school. heheheheh.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:30, archived)
# Heh heh... "Joey says...
...quaaaack, quakquakquak."

Send an email to ca la ti am ca ld ot co m (I think) about your missing icon. If not, then the contact page of www.iamcal.com will do you I am sure. Mine didn't show for a long time and it's easy to feel aggrieved, but Cal was ace about sorting it out.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:47, archived)
# Aaaah
I only donated yesterday (finally got my Paypal working). Was not really starting to worry about the icon yet, was just being silly.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:51, archived)
# Aye, took mine about a week or so to appear
chill.

in fact, you could make use of the time, and fashion a small hat, or similar manner of humourous icon adornment in anticipation of its arrival...
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:55, archived)
# I would
If I had the faintest idea how to do that.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 12:00, archived)
# oooooh
nice hat!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 12:01, archived)
# he looks happy
awww
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:21, archived)
# He was my childhood hero
Well, he was more phat than Peter Duncan or John Noakes.
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:22, archived)
# If you squint...........
He kinda looks like Moby or maybe Michael Stipe
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:23, archived)
# Has he just shat?
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:26, archived)
# pfft!
(, Wed 2 Feb 2005, 11:46, archived)