Design Star vs. Snowflake in OLAP Land
| Star vs. Snowflake in OLAP Land |
| Written by Jesse Orosz |
| Wednesday, 28 May 2008 23:47 |
|
About six months ago I had a discussion with another guy about what my preferred data warehouse schema was: snowflake or star. Without hesitation I said snowflake. He looked at me with befuddlement and asked why. I told him that OLAP processes dimensions more efficiently against a snowflaked schema instead of a star. We had nearly a twenty minute discussion exactly why Analysis Services likes snowflakes better than stars but I failed to convince him. He firmly believed that the star schema was superior and anything short of me taking his firstborn hostage wouldn't change his belief in that. Star vs snowflake usually initiates that type of steadfastness. To back up my believe I put together a test. I created a dimension with three levels with each level having two attributes that were outside of the "Advertiser-Ad Campaign-Banner Ad" hierarchy. A total of nine attributes in the dimension. |
Top Rated
- SSAS Implementation Best Practices slides in PDF format
- SSRS Report Against a SSAS Parent Hierarchy
- Using AS Data Mining to Add Forecast Values to a Cube
- Handling inter-dimensional members dependency and reducing cube sparsity using reference dimensions in Analysis Services 2005
- Cube structure optimization for MDX query performance in Analysis Services 2005 SP2: Tips for Parent Child Hierarchies usage
- Handling Multiple Calendars with a M2M Scenario
- Passing MDX parameters in Reporting Services reports
- Using UserName to Control Data Access and Default Member in SSAS 2K5 (Carrie Williams)
