Re: 1600 Column limit..

Hi,

Maybe a view can help you. You can design your database as needed and let your
applications see what they want to see. You can write some triggers so that
applications can update through the view.

A view with 1600 columns is ugly too, but better than a row with 1600 columns.
Ok - you will have trouble do 1600 selfjoins in one view :-(

Another solution is to offer your applications some stored procedures, which
collects the data.

In a 1600 column table the database will do a linear search for data in a row.

Tommi

Am Donnerstag, 14. November 2002 16:14 schrieb Williams, Travis L, NPONS:
> 1) What is the "array datatype"? I looked for this under data types and
> didn't see it.
>
> 2) We have a huge amount of scripts that basically maintain the our
> network as a whole. They are wanting to start off by getting out of
> using a 20 meg flat file because every time they do an update it takes
> forever.. so we are trying to mimic what they have in the file.. then
> in the future we can get them to change how their data is structured..
> in their datafile they have it set up exactly like the db is.. lotsa
> columns.. then they look for different trends in the data.. or they look
> for specific values per shelf.. I understand how this could be done with
> this information all together.. but getting them to do change thier
> scripts is something else.. what I did was break it down into 3 seperate
> tables.. with each piece of information in a different one..
> Travis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tino Wildenhain [mailto:tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de]
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 7:44 AM
> To: Williams, Travis L, NPONS; Gavin M. Roy;
> pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 1600 Column limit..
>
>
> Hi Williams,
>
> --On Mittwoch, 13. November 2002 22:27 -0500 "Williams, Travis L, NPONS"
>
> <tlw(at)att(dot)com> wrote:
> > we have to have all of that information per shelf.. so we have the
> > columns with the information then each row is a different shelf..
>
> which
>
> > to start with there are 400.. which could grow to upwards to any
>
> number..
>
> > but I did split all of this up into seperate tables.. Travis
>
> Seems you are a bit influenced by Makarenko ;)
> To your problem: I see you have all these information
> which appears to be in a row - but whats the use other
> then the storage? How to find a special Slot and look
> for its contents? If you would instead have some related
> tables, the job is easy - all slots could be indexed.
> Otherwise you could use 1 column and use the array datatype
> as well. I dont know if there is a limit in the array datatype,
> but I would not expect one.
>
> Regards
> Tino
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gavin M. Roy [mailto:gmr(at)justsportsusa(dot)com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 8:19 PM
> > To: Williams, Travis L, NPONS; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 1600 Column limit..
> >
> >
> > Seems like a more effective layout would be
> >
> > create table tracking (
> > i_slot int4,
> > i_port int4,
> > i_item int4 );
> >
> > maybe i'm missing somthing, but a 1600 row table is tiny, a 1600
>
> column
>
> > table would be very difficult to manage, and poor design.
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > Williams, Travis L, NPONS wrote:
> >> The reason we have that is we have 23 slots in a shelf (of equipment)
> >> and we have 23 ports in a slot. We are tracking 3 different items
>
> per
>
> >> port.. so we have 23 x 23 which is 529 x 3 which is 1587 individual
> >> items to track of which they are all a single digit. You add into
>
> that
>
> >> some misc. stuff like shelf name and poll_time and it becomes a
>
> mess..
>
> >> I just split them into 3 seperate tables.
> >>
> >> Travis
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Joe Tomcat [mailto:tomcat(at)mobile(dot)mp]
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 1:35 PM
> >> To: Williams, Travis L, NPONS
> >> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> >> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 1600 Column limit..
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 17:23, Williams, Travis L, NPONS wrote:
> >>> Is this set in stone.. or is there somewhere you can change this..
>
> and
>
> >> will changing it cause upgrade problems in the future..
> >>
> >> If you are trying to have 1600 columns in a table, you probably have
> >> made a design mistake in your table design. You should take a look
>
> at
>
> >> some database design books to see if you can change the structure.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------(end of
>
> broadcast)---------------------------
>
> >> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> >> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to
>
> majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > Scanned by Sophos Anti-Virus v3.59TPOS, MIMEDefang v2.19,
> > and Spam Assassin v2.31 on satchel.bteg.net
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of
>
> broadcast)---------------------------
>
> > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org

--
Dr. Eckhardt + Partner GmbH
http://www.epgmbh.de