Re: maximum number of columns per table

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1090377898.272706_at_yasure>...
> Joel Garry wrote:
 

> > Normalization is another matter, of course. What I've found is there
> > are some cases where it makes sense to put things together with lots
> > of rows and columns, and then let the user do what they want.
>
> I can only think of two:
>
> 1. Management ordered you to do so.

Actually, I agree with you 99.999%. But this .001% is a substantial part of my income, and I suspect, many others. :-)

And from a practical standpoint, [useful] tables never exist in isolation. There is bound to be an existing software/hardware/business process infrastructure - apart from complete business process reengineering, which may or may not make sense (and has a bad rep just now), and what one might call greenfield software.

...  

> > Your argument of bad design is backwards - design should lead where it
> > leads.
> >
> > jg
>
> The limit on the number of columns has nothing to do with the database.
> It has to do with the width of a piece of paper run through a printer.
>
> <RANT>
> What I mean by that is that all of this is focusing on getting the data
> into the database rather than getting it back out. Developers
> traditionally take the self-serving attitude that they will make it easy
> to store the data now and let the report writers that come along later
> figure out how to get it back out.
>
> So how many times does a row get inserted into a database? Once.
>
> And how many times is the row reported on from inside the database? Many.
>
> The efforts are generally just passing the buck from those most
> technically qualified to those less well qualified. And it not
> something of which developers should be proud though for some reason
> they are.
> </RANT>
>
> Daniel Morgan

An excellent rant, Daniel. Some of the old formal design methodologies start with the desired output. Even RAD style iterative methodologies tend to have some part where you present things to the customer and say "is this what you want?" Of course, with the latter, the customer may say "well, I want a spreadsheet." Happens to me all the time, and I share your opinions about Excel. Are we to be starving artists holding on to our ideals or skilled craftsmen selling out for our families? (My answer is generally to present the correct solution, then do what the customer says he wants me to. Those decisions are management's purview, not mine.)

What seems to be at odds here is whether someone is sitting down at a blank screen and arbitrarily designing a table with 1000 columns. That would likely be bad design. Can we really conclude that from the OP? I don't think so, because there is other software involved, it is not a greenfield. Design can't, shouldn't say the output is always for a printer.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.

Living in Beta:  http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf/f2abee2df7582f36cc2569a4007e4ab9/b28f47e0ac75bfddcc256eba0080fe2f!OpenDocument