Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
DMP
Starting Member
41 Posts |
 Posted - 2007-01-16 : 03:54:52
|
| Hi,In my current project,We are going to implement new business logic.I need to store some data for this purpose. Let in Table A (Cols No:90) at present. for the ne enhancement we need to add some cols(50)for Table A.My Question is :What is the best policy to add fifty cols in Table A or Add an additional (Table A1) with same PK of Table A in performance point of view ?Regards, |
|
|
harsh_athalye
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
5581 Posts |
Posted - 2007-01-16 : 04:12:03
|
| There is a tradeoff involved here between no. of joins vs. no. of columns in single table. If you frequently need to refer some of those columns, you will have to frequently join with main table and bring the data whereas keeping 140 columns in single table is headache in terms of managability. You also need to consider that row size in SQL 2000 can not exceed 8060 bytes.Harsh AthalyeIndia."The IMPOSSIBLE is often UNTRIED" |
 |
|
|
jsmith8858
Dr. Cross Join
7423 Posts |
Posted - 2007-01-16 : 08:44:27
|
| Questions like the one you are asking cannot be answered correctly in a general sense; it always depends specifically on the data that you are storing.Your best bet is to properly normalize your database. I am willing to bet that out of these 140 columns many of them belong in related table, and I also am willing to be that many are repeating values that should be stored in related rows.- Jeff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which is best policy Additional Cols or Table