Re: More then 1600 columns? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From John R Pierce
Subject Re: More then 1600 columns?
Date
Msg-id 4CDCDB94.2080300@hogranch.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: More then 1600 columns?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: More then 1600 columns?
List pgsql-general
On 11/11/10 9:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Mark Mitchell"<mmitchell@riccagroup.com>  writes:
>> Is there are hard limit of 1600 that you cannot get around?
> Yes.
>
> Generally, wanting more than a few dozen columns is a good sign that you
> need to rethink your schema design.  What are you trying to accomplish
> exactly?
>

indeed.    I'd say a good read on 'data normalization' and the Third
Normal Form would be in order.

relational databases are *not* spreadsheets (and, for that matter,
spreadsheets make lousy relational databases)

if these 1600+ elements come from an ORM, you probably need to rethink
your object model, as no sane object class should have that many members.



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: More then 1600 columns?
Next
From: Dmitriy Igrishin
Date:
Subject: Re: More then 1600 columns?