Re: 23,000 Tables?

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 10:44:53 -0800
Message-ID: <1163961904.939820@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

cd2448 wrote:
> Ed Prochak wrote:

>> [snip]
>>
>> I agree with joel, this definitely does not require one table per
>> report. It also does not need megacolumn tables either. I've seen and
>> worked on what I think are similar systems. Take a step back and
>> reconsider your design.
>>
>> Ed

>
> i would love to. but we don't have the option to normalize the tables,
> which would be the real best practice approach, because we must have
> all fields in one table for a given report.

On what basis MUST you have all fields in one table for a report?

Internal business rule?
What reporting tool?
Inability to build views?
Desire to do something the worst possible way?

I would help to know what is driving these statements.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

Received on Sun Nov 19 2006 - 12:44:53 CST