Re: Table with 90 columns

Ligia Pimentel schrieb:
> Yes, a very wide table (many columns) will be less efficient than a table
> with less columns (this is a matter of relational concepts and
> normalization).
>
> I suspect you could re-check your relational design and find many fields
> that are very repetitive. If you really think you need all this columns in
> the same table because of the nature of your application (which I doubt), it
> will be reasonable to divide the fields in the table according to the
> frecuency of use of each group of fields (a lot of fields will be almost
> fixed, -not updated often- and other will be updated frequenly). Like the
> parts of the record that are related to general iformation and the other
> fields that are related to transactions or balances or status.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> http://www.devshed.com/Server_Side/MySQL/Normal/Normal1/print_html
> http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=4887&pg=1
>
>
> Good day!
>
> Ligia

Unfortunately I need every column in my application. The problem is,
that the application is Web-based, and it would be a lot more logic
needed on the client-side to separate into general and other
information. The client is just a web-browser, so it is difficult (hence
partly possible) to implement that logic. Is there any hint, how many
columns per table are still reasonable?

TIA

Michael