Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Recommended Posts

I am trying to build an excel model with several files of 200 MB eahc one and all toghether will reach at least 10 GB size.

 

I can't open more than 500 MB , i have al I7 processor and 16 GB RAM. Does anybody know what version of excel is better?, i began with 2007 , now i just changed to 2010 but i have more problems.

 

When i try to insert a new column excel says there are not sufficient resources, r something like that

 

Should I use the 64 bit version of excel?

 

On the other hand, Windows XP or windows 7?

 

Please i need help

 

Many thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try importing your data into an SQL database. Some options to consider are:

 

  • SQL Server Express (free with restrictions) or SQL Server (pay) by Microsoft
  • MySQL by Oracle (free with restrictions)
  • PostgreSQL by an Open Source Community (free with no restrictions)

 

SQL Server Express may be the easiest for you.

 

Make sure you backup your source data!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not have enough expertise in Excel to answer your question. However, I do have enough experience to communicate that I second the above posters comments that this would be much better suited work for a SQL database. I personally use MS SQL Server for my data repository, and am quite pleased. The other databases the above poster identifies would work as well. Although the code for the statistical math components is more difficult to generate in SQL, the database is very efficient in handling very large data sets. Also, Ad Hoc reporting of your data is very simple using a SQL database. I have a system at work that performs about seven million updates every day on hardware inferior to yours without any issues at all.

 

Best Wishes . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for your comments. I don´t know anything about SQL programming. So which one of these softwares would you recommend to me? how much time do you think it would take to reach the minimum level required to do the same as anyone can do using excel? There is one easer and simple than others at using math formulas.

 

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am trying to build an excel model with several files of 200 MB eahc one and all toghether will reach at least 10 GB size.

 

I can't open more than 500 MB , i have al I7 processor and 16 GB RAM. Does anybody know what version of excel is better?, i began with 2007 , now i just changed to 2010 but i have more problems.

 

When i try to insert a new column excel says there are not sufficient resources, r something like that

 

Should I use the 64 bit version of excel?

 

On the other hand, Windows XP or windows 7?

 

Please i need help

 

Many thanks

definitely 64 bit of everything --- 64 bit OS, 64 bit excel, lotsa RAM

 

the latest excel can open a million rows of data

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you can continue to use excel by simply adding horsepower to the equation, however in my opinion, it will not do it efficiently and that is why it is necessary to continue to ramp up your hardware. Do not get me wrong, I use excel every single day to perform functions for which it is well suited, but I also know what other systems (databases) do well and rely on them when they are more efficient.

 

To answer your questions:

 

So which one of these softwares would you recommend to me?

 

I have not used all available database software, so I cannot comment on which is the best, and they all do something better than others, but I have chosen MS SQL Server to accomplish my database tasks. It is robust enough for my purposes, and is easy to create databases and tables, import data, manage data, and manipulate this data. It is the one database that is tightly linked to Excel in case you wish to import/exprt data to from excel (which I do).

 

how much time do you think it would take to reach the minimum level required to do the same as anyone can do using excel?

 

I cannot answer this as I do not know what you are doing with Excel. Excel truly does a good job at quickly summarizing data in a mathematical and statistical sense. It has many built in functions to perform this work. I myself have custom code working in my Excel spreadsheets that I find very useful. SQL coding is similar to building custom formulas in excel. The good news is if you do not know how to code in SQL, you can find hundreds of examples on the internet that work with little or no modification. To give you an example, once you learn how to perform basic data manipulation in SQL (which could be accomplished in a day or two (IMO), if you are computer savvy), it takes me about as long to code a custom formula in Excel as it does for me to write SQL code for the formula. The main difference is SQL allows for a lot more flexibility in how my data is displayed and grouped, and it is much more efficient when dealing with large data sets.

 

Is one easier and simple than others at using math formulas.

 

I do not know which one is easier or more simple for math and statistics, as I think each have a similar baseline for achieving this goal. I use MS SQL Server due to it being less complex to perform the functions I require in a simple and efficient manner. We mainly use Oracle at work, and other systems that I work on a weekly basis include PostGres and MySQL, but at the end of the day, I prefer to use MS SQL for my purposes as I can manipulate the data faster (import, export, create databases/tables, etc.) than I can with the other systems. Also, I prefer the GUI of MS SQL, for managing and manipulating data than the other programs, although I am sure others would have a different opinion.

As the previous poster mentioned, the lightweight version of MS SQL is a no cost solution.

 

In the end, you can accomplish what you are looking for on anything from paper and pencil, a spreadsheet, or a database, it just depends on the amount of efficiency you are expecting.

 

Best Wishes . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am trying to build an excel model with several files of 200 MB eahc one and all toghether will reach at least 10 GB size.

 

I can't open more than 500 MB , i have al I7 processor and 16 GB RAM. Does anybody know what version of excel is better?, i began with 2007 , now i just changed to 2010 but i have more problems.

 

When i try to insert a new column excel says there are not sufficient resources, r something like that

 

Should I use the 64 bit version of excel?

 

On the other hand, Windows XP or windows 7?

 

Please i need help

 

Many thanks

 

May be time to ditch Excel and move to better suited Statistical Packages. R is one of them. Free and lots of addons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.