RE: Disk Space (was Leading Zeroes in PF)

I agree that focusing on disk space issues while developing a database
design is not the primary concern.  

With that said, most companies are having problems with disk capacity
and disk space growth.  The cost of a disk drive is just the tip of the
iceberg.  Let's not forget the tower or unit it is housed in, the disk
controller, the extra tapes used to backup and the extra cost to store
off-site (and maybe the extra space to replicate), the extra time for
tape backups to run, the extra time to practice or do (God forbid) a
real recovery, the extra maintenance costs when you're forced to add a
tower or rack mounted unit, the extra power requirements when adding
towers, the extra memory (and maintenance costs) you'll need to get
decent performance, and I'm sure there are plenty of other costs that I
haven't listed.  Someone else pipe in.... you guys always do!  (:o)

Glenn

Douglas W. Palme wrote:
> That is exactly why I wanted to use it, cut down the amount of disk
space 
> needed by using a packed field.

Disk space is cheaper than your time :)

david