------=_Part_2710_15483184.1209312889710
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Any chance this could be a view?
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Jean-David Beyer
> <jeandavid8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > In another thread, the O.P. had a question about a large table with
over
> 100
> > columns. Is this usual? Whenever I make a database, which is not
often,
> it
> > ends up with tables that rarely have over to columns, and usually
less
> than
> > that. When normalized, my tables rarely get very wide.
>
> Yes, even in several well-normalized schemas I've seen tables with
> over 250 columns.
>
> > Without criticising the O.P., since I know nothing about his
> application, I
> > am curious how it comes about that such a wide table is justified.
>
> The few applications I've seen with large tables were an insurance
> system, an manufacturing system, and a sensor-recording system (which
> was more optimal to store as an attribute-per-instance-of-time than a
> separate tuple containing the time, sensor, and value).
>
> --
> Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
> EnterpriseDB Cor****ation | fax: 732.331.1301
> 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
>
------=_Part_2710_15483184.1209312889710
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Any chance this could be a view? <br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On
Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Jonah H. Harris <<a
href="mailto:jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Jean-David Beyer<br>
<<a href="mailto:jeandavid8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">jeandavid8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
wrote:<br>
> In another thread, the O.P. had a question about a large table with
over 100<br>
> columns. Is this usual? Whenever I make a database, which is
not often, it<br>
> ends up with tables that rarely have over to columns, and
usually less than<br>
> that. When normalized, my tables rarely get very wide.<br>
<br>
</div>Yes, even in several well-normalized schemas I've seen tables
with<br>
over 250 columns.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> Without criticising the O.P., since I know nothing about his
application, I<br>
> am curious how it comes about that such a wide table is
justified.<br>
<br>
</div>The few applications I've seen with large tables were an
insurance<br>
system, an manufacturing system, and a sensor-recording system (which<br>
was more optimal to store as an attribute-per-instance-of-time than a<br>
separate tuple containing the time, sensor, and value).<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324<br>
EnterpriseDB Cor****ation | fax: 732.331.1301<br>
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | <a
href="mailto:jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">jonah.harris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
><br>
Edison, NJ 08837 | <a href="http://www.enterprisedb.com/"
target="_blank">http://www.enterprisedb.com/</a><br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
--<br>
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (<a
href="mailto:pgsql-sql@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">pgsql-sql@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>)<br>
To make changes to your subscription:<br>
<a href="http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql"
target="_blank">http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_2710_15483184.1209312889710--
|
