From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | btober(at)seaworthysys(dot)com |
Cc: | m_tessier(at)sympatico(dot)ca, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How many fields in a table are too many |
Date: | 2003-06-26 07:28:19 |
Message-ID: | 20030626072819.GD26472@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 03:17:12AM -0400, btober(at)seaworthysys(dot)com wrote:
> > I have a table with 13 fields. Is that
> > too many fields for one table.
> > Mark
> >
>
> Thirteen? No way. I've got you beat with 21:
Pfft! Is *that* all? I've got a table with 116 fields. Very soon we'll be
upgrading to 7.3 and we can them merrily DROP COLUMN half of them. Until
then...
The original developers didn't really have a concept of storing different
info in different tables.
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> "the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or
> religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.
> Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."
> - Samuel P. Huntington
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Childs | 2003-06-26 07:33:10 | Re: Question regarding performance (large objects involved) |
Previous Message | Kallol Nandi | 2003-06-26 07:28:11 | Re: How many fields in a table are too many |