Re: max # of columns in the table (again!)

dias wrote:

> Thank you all,
>
> I agree, it's a design problem.
>
> But I'm serching for arguments to prove that this design is bad.
>
> I have to migrate data from an old application to Oracle, the database
> users, it's a DTWH, don't want to change the data model, and prefer to
> work with wide tables, rather than small ones whith joins.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ydias_at_hotmail.com (dias) wrote in message news:<55a68b47.0302142315.39934901_at_posting.google.com>...
> > Hi,
> >
> > 1000 columns is the max for a table (8i and 9i).
> >
> > Oracle (8i) has an internal limit of 255. That means that if any
> > columns beyond 255 are not null, that row will always be chained.
> >
> > Is this still the case in 9i ?
> >
> > Thanks

If those that control the design are reluctant to either (A) admit their mistake or (B) consider that there may be a beter way you are likely, for political rather than technical reasons, stuck.

The best argument I can suggest you make to them involves an estimate, in dollars and hours, of the cost of dealing with their nonsense.

Daniel Morgan Received on Sun Feb 16 2003 - 12:27:20 CST