Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 472019
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T00:02:40+00:00 2026-05-13T00:02:40+00:00

I have a table with 30 columns and about 3.4 million records. Is it

  • 0

I have a table with 30 columns and about 3.4 million records. Is it reasonable for SELECT * FROM [Table]; to take 8 to 12 minutes to return all 3.4 million results?

If not, where’s a good place/resource to begin diagnosing my problem?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T00:02:40+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 12:02 am

    It’s most likely that SQL server is doing its best to get the data you asked for.
    It’s not unreasonable to assume at least 1K/record for 30 columns.
    3.4M x 1K = 3.4Gb.

    Just reading 3.4Gb from the disk could take minutes on an average machine (do not forget that this is not just reading, there’s obviously some SQL processing overhead in it.

    But of course in a real world scenario you don’t want to retrieve all the data…

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a very large database with about 120 Million records in one table.I
I have a table with about 20+ million records. Structure is like: EventId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER
I have about 1 million rows on users table and have columns A AA
I have a InnoDB table that has about 17 normalized columns with ~6 million
I have a very large table (few million records). The columns in the table
I have a Postgres table with about 4.5 million rows. The columns are basically
Say I have a large table, about 2 million rows and 50 columns. Using
I have a MS SQL table with about 8 million records. There is a
Okay, here's the situation: We have a table of about 50 columns (created by
I have table with two columns (varchar from, varchar to). This table represents connections

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.