I am not sure on this, but maybe it helps you a bit further for now. Edmund Dengler wrote:
Greetings!
I wish to insert a new <a>=(1,2) thing. Do I do? bat("a_p1").append(1); bat("a_p2").append(2);
How do I ensure that the "voids" are always synced? Is this just "assumed"?
I think you are responsible yourself to keep the bats "synched". That means that you have to ensure they are the same length. As far as I know, a void is just a virtual oid, which is just a number going up each record. I could be wrong.
There is the phrase "When two BATs effectively contain the same sequence of head elements, we call them 'synced'. This is implemented by storing a very large OID for each column. An update to the column destroys this OID.". This sounds as if any update/append breaks the correspondence, and also that it will limit the number of rows in the table (as an OID is a 32-bit number of 32-bit systems).
Correct. The number of rows in a BAT are limited by the number of bits your system has.
If I have 10 properties I am tracking, would I pick one as the "primary" BAT, and sync() all others to it?
I think SQL keeps internally the bats equal in length and does the administration itself also. I hope this made some sense. A more precise answer follows hopefully soon.