s_laha@rediffmail.com (Surajit Laha) wrote in message news:<ba8ee108.0403212257.2c6eba95@posting.google.com>...
> Hi all,
>
> In SQL Server we have concept of Pages.
> Page size is specified to be of 8k i.e., 8192 bytes. That consists of
> following:
>
> Page Header - 96 bytes
> Data Rows
> And
> Row offsets
>
> Now SQL Server online documentation says maximum size of one data row can be
> 8060 bytes.
>
> If that is the case then 8192-8060-96 = 36
>
> So, my question is Does SQL Server keep that 36 bytes for row offset (for
> one row an offset requires 2 bytes) ?
>
> If there is only one row to be accomodated in a page then can the maximum
> size of a row not be extended to 6094 bytes (keeping 2 bytes for one offset)
> ?
>
>
> This seems to be very silly question, I am sure there must be some logical
> reason behind keeping this figure of 8060 bytes.
>
> Please help!

"G" <nospamplease@here.com> wrote in message news:<c3mfar$ild$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>...
> Are you the same Simon Hayes that works for Smarter Finance or Dry Media?
> Or is it Webscript?
>
> Cant remember, but I certainly recognise your name, think I have done some
> work with a Simon hayes in the past.
>
> G.
>

"Simon Hayes" <sql@hayes.ch> wrote in message
news:60cd0137.0403220223.1555b7d2@posting.google.com...
> s_laha@rediffmail.com (Surajit Laha) wrote in message
news:<ba8ee108.0403212257.2c6eba95@posting.google.com>...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > In SQL Server we have concept of Pages.
> > Page size is specified to be of 8k i.e., 8192 bytes. That consists of
> > following:
> >
> > Page Header - 96 bytes
> > Data Rows
> > And
> > Row offsets
> >
> > Now SQL Server online documentation says maximum size of one data row
can be
> > 8060 bytes.
> >
> > If that is the case then 8192-8060-96 = 36
> >
> > So, my question is Does SQL Server keep that 36 bytes for row offset
(for
> > one row an offset requires 2 bytes) ?
> >
> > If there is only one row to be accomodated in a page then can the
maximum
> > size of a row not be extended to 6094 bytes (keeping 2 bytes for one
offset)
> > ?
> >
> >
> > This seems to be very silly question, I am sure there must be some
logical
> > reason behind keeping this figure of 8060 bytes.
> >
> > Please help!
>
> As a complete guess, it's more efficient to establish a fixed maximum
> row length, even if the theoretical maximum could be slightly larger
> in some cases. There's no exact reason given for this in Books Online
> (or in Inside SQL Server 2000), but I guess it's not an issue for most
> people. Do you have a specific problem with fitting data into a row?
> If so, maybe you could post some details, and someone may be able to
> suggest an alternative solution.
>
> Simon