"Bob Peel, MVP" <bob_peel[at]kiandra.freeserve.co.uk.INVALID> wrote on 13
Apr 2008 in group microsoft.public.money:

- quote -

Thinking of this from a database administrator point of view:

* It will be a step graph. A new, empty database will have a minimum size
just to contain the empty tables.

* As you add transactions, the size will grow more or less linearly.

* Initializing new subfeatures, like budgeting and inventory, will cause
the creation of a bunch of new tables, causing additional steps in the
graph. This assumes, of course, that the application is properly designed.
If the programmers were lazy, they just started out with every table
enabled whether you'll ever use it or not. I wouldn't bet a penny on the
programmers.
--
Steve B.
New Life Home Improvement

Re Dick's point 1) I have no scientific proof but just a gut feeling that
the .mny file grows at a 45 degree linear graph but then flattens out after
a while. As I say no proof just a gut feel.

--
Regards
Bob Peel,
Microsoft MVP - Money

For UK tips & fixes see
http://support.microsoft.com/default...d=fh;EN-GB;mny.


I do not respond to any emails that I have not specifically asked for.

"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:ezERmzYnIHA.5160[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

That's the theory behind archiving.

The reality is quite different.

1) Money data files don't--or haven't yet--grown into gigabytes. Mine's got
data since 1993. It's 66,180kB as of this morning. Some people have reported
over 100 MB. In the meanwhile, we can now buy terabyte disk drives--big
enough to hold 10,000 100MB Money files--for under $200. We can now buy 8GB
flash thumb drives. We can buy optical media that can store 50GB. So, the
absolute size of a Money data file is less significant now than it's ever
been. It would appear to me unlikely that my data file will ever grow past
what will fit on a CD-R in my lifetime at its present growth rate and
assuming any future versions of Money don't grow the file at a **much**
faster rate than all versions since M02 have grown it. And by then, what
will available storage capacities and costs have done? Given this, it's hard
to get excited about the size of a Money data file. (I've been scanning old
slides and negatives recently. One box of slides, scanned, creates a
collection of files larger than all of the Money data files I have stored on
my network put together.)

2) Archiving doesn't remove ANYTHING from the archive file. The archive file
is a complete copy of the data file before you archived it. (Most folks who
feel compelled to archive do not understand this fact.)

3) Archiving doesn't remove everything before the archive date from the
ongoing file. It just removes transactions that have nothing to do with any
investment accounts. Even a transfer component of a split transaction that
transfers to an Investment Cash Account, say a 401(k) cash contribution from
a paycheck, will prevent the transaction from being archived out. In my
case, this is a HUGE amount of transaction information that wouldn't be
removed. I did some research and quantification on this once and posted it.
You might want to peruse the groups.google.com archives for the thread or if
you are interested ask and I'll try to take the time to find it.

4) There is no realistic way to ever plan on being able to view the entire
history of transactions in one piece again. For some of us, this one
limitation is the deal breaker on archiving. Worse, it fixes all of this
data at the version that did the archiving. Any subsequent use of this data
implies successful ability to upgrade the file to the version of Money you
are then using. I'd rather take my chances once a year or so on my one
ongoing data file than betting on the come that n years from now I can
upgrade an archive file if I need something from it.

Just some thoughts.

"Mike" <Mike[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CCA41198-D4B8-45C1-8501-B2FDCBA34488[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

My Money file which I have been keeping since 1996 (no archiving) weighs in
at 17 MB. I think it will be quite a while before it reaches 1 TB.
--
Peace,
BobJ

"Cal Learner-- MVP" <via_newsgroup[at]please.tnx> wrote in message
news:ruc40497585tti658m4t4th1nrci2kapon[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

In microsoft.public.money, Mike wrote:

- quote -

So it's good that you had this discussion. The transactions in a
Money file are usually a small factor in file size.

Many people hope/assume that archiving will give a significantly
smaller or faster file. It's easy to see why they would make those
assumptions. Those people are generally not happy with the Archive
function. There are people who know the limitations and still like
to use the Archive function. As far as I can tell, they like pruning
the old non-investment transactions for neatness. They give up
generating some report information with the old transactions.

Archiving does get rid of some old Payees. In Money Plus, even
archiving to a date before your first transactions can make some
small improvements. You were looking for bigger improvements.

- quote -

Money files don't grow exponentially as hard drive and flash drive
sizes do, so not really. Yes, they can exceed 100 MB. But this is a
day when even flash drives are measured in GB rather than MB.

- quote -

Getting Money to shed old quotes can be helpful. Minimizing the
amount of stocks that fetch quotes will slow the growth of the Money
file. You could keep your actually accounting and your stock study
"watch" in different files.

QIF export and then import into a new file will give you a new small
clean file. It can be a fair amount of work, and the results will
still have some limitations.

This raises a question in my mind.

I was under the impression that one of the purposes for Archiving was to
reduce the overall size of the Money file by specifying which date period to
Archive.

If no one really archives, can't the Money file grow eventually without
bound, theorecally, into the gigabytes, terrabytes, etc.?

I'd think that most folks wouldn't really want to carry this huge file
baggage around with them, perhaps?

Is there a better way, then, to reduce our Money file every few years or so,
other then archiving?

-Mike


"Marilyn & Bob" wrote:

- quote -

Let's try Dick's answer in a different way. (excuse the shouting) DON'T
ARCHIVE. There is no benefit to archiving. I assume that you did the
archive recently. Just go back to the saved file that was created when you
did the archive and update it with any new transactions. This is the file
you want to use.
--
Peace,
BobJ

"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:ORMmEhdmIHA.1280[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Well, Archiving isn't supposed to whack the bills. But NONE of the regulars
here archive--and most recommend against it--so none of us would have seen
this if it did so.

"Brian Kitt" <BrianKitt[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B1B1A227-B9C4-46C8-B8AA-9D7C7EF089B8[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

When I do an archive, all of my bills disappear. How do I archive without
losing my bills?