From: esquel@sommarskog.se   
      
   Michael Cole (noone@invalid.com) writes:   
   > This is one where there seems to be a lot of conflicting advice out   
   > there in google-land.   
   >   
   > If we have tables with one or more wide columns - VarChar with size of   
   > over 8K in total - should these columns be moved to their own   
   > wide-column table with the initial table simply linking to them?  Is   
   > there much of an advantage/disadvantage to this, or does it actually   
   > depend on how much is stored in them, not the empty column widths?   
      
   Yes, that's the answer: it depends.   
      
   For instance, If I add an xml column to store some freer-form data, I may   
   not want to store it out of table just because it could fit more than 8K of   
   data.   
      
   And if I have table where the main meat is the BLOB data, it is not likely   
   that I would like to store it in a separate table.   
      
   But it the blob is not often accessed and the table have lots of columns and   
   I expect scans to be common place, storing it in a separte table makes   
   sense.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se   
      
   Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at   
   http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx   
   Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at   
   http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)