Looking at examples in Adventure Works and the Kimball equivalent client
dimensions are at an individual account level. How realistic is this for
very large account dimensions on order of 30 - 50 million accounts?
Obviously this was not feasible in the 2000 AS version. Thanks.
Dave

I would think it is simply a matter of hardware. The limit for members in a
dimention is over 2billion, so clearly there is no concern about hitting the
hard limit. I have a client with 6400 databases on a server. Most people
would say that isn't "realistic". It performance is acceptable, although
some things are not really feasible (such as using third party tools with
the server which barf on the amount of system information related to the
databases!). :-)

--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.

"Dave" <Dave@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:19A8AF6E-843A-4C2C-A0C9-90516CD416E6@microsoft.com...
> Looking at examples in Adventure Works and the Kimball equivalent client
> dimensions are at an individual account level. How realistic is this for
> very large account dimensions on order of 30 - 50 million accounts?
> Obviously this was not feasible in the 2000 AS version. Thanks.
> Dave

AS2000 is limited to 64000 children members by member
(the all level can contains only 64 000 children, each one can contains up
to 64 000 members...)
so you can handle 50 millions of accounts.
and its a realistic case to keep this level of detail

but regarding your needs, maybe you don't need this level of detail.


"Dave" <Dave@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:19A8AF6E-843A-4C2C-A0C9-90516CD416E6@microsoft.com...
> Looking at examples in Adventure Works and the Kimball equivalent client
> dimensions are at an individual account level. How realistic is this for
> very large account dimensions on order of 30 - 50 million accounts?
> Obviously this was not feasible in the 2000 AS version. Thanks.
> Dave