More Columns VS More Tables - Which is better?
Posted by: joel webb
Date: May 18, 2005 05:24PM

We are at the point in our company that we are planning on combining three
tables: our For Sale Properties, our Apartments properties and our
Residential Rentals.

The question is: At what point does it benefit us to separate the information
that is likely to be "in common" with other properties from another table?

For Instance: If table A has twenty columns that are in common with table B.
What would provide the faster search?

1. To have two tables with the twenty "IN COMMON" columns in a separate table.
We know that you would have to do table joins ALL the time in order to
provide results, but it might be faster and better organized.

2. To have two tables with similar 20 columns, but they might not be used for
all the properties being put into the table. For searches, no joins would
have to be used, and no "SELECT *" would be used. Just the columns that we
want.

If 20 columns is not big enough, how many columns would it take for us to slow
down the query over a table joined query?

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject
Written By
Posted
More Columns VS More Tables - Which is better?
May 18, 2005 05:24PM


Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.

Content reproduced on this site is the property of the respective copyright holders. It is not reviewed in advance by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Oracle or any other party.