Table column count competition

[AspDotNetDev]

I'd add a record to the [Brendan Fraser] table.

Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

[GuyThiebaut]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: +5

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

― Christopher Hitchens

[dan sh]

Assuming you use SQL 2008, you are still 29845 short.

"The worst code you'll come across is code you wrote last year.", wizardzz[^]

[jeron1]

AspDotNetDev wrote:

[Brendan Fraser] table.

Congratulations! You have just won the 'Came Out of Left Field Reference of the Day' award (COOLFRODA). :-D

[PIEBALDconsult]

Referential integrity would prevent that.

[Mike Hankey]

So would birth control!

VS2010/Atmel Studio 6.0 ToDo Manager Extension
Version 3.0 now available. There is no place like 127.0.0.1

[PIEBALDconsult]

SELECT TOP 1 * FROM
(
SELECT s.Name AS [Schema name]
, t.Name AS [Table Name]
, COUNT(*) AS [Column Count]
FROM sys.Tables AS t
JOIN sys.Schemas AS s
ON T.schema_id=s.schema_id
JOIN sys.Columns AS C
ON t.Object_ID = c.Object_ID
GROUP BY s.Name,t.Name
) T
ORDER BY [Column Count] DESC

Shows me 107.

[PIEBALDconsult]

Too late for that.

[Mike Hankey]

I'd recommend a lobotomy, but I'm afraid Mr. Fraiser has already had his!

VS2010/Atmel Studio 6.0 ToDo Manager Extension
Version 3.0 now available. There is no place like 127.0.0.1

[lewax00]

Murder is just late term birth control.

[Ennis Ray Lynch Jr]

Move it to the fourth normal and get rid of the nulls.

Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. I also do Android Programming as I find it a refreshing break from the MS. "And they, since they Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs" -- Robert Frost

[Jeremy Hutchinson]

We have a table with 289 columns. It's in our insurance reserves calculating database, and I have no idea what the table actually does, and I don't think I want to know (there are 7 tables with more than 140 columns)

My Blog[^] Chess Tactics for WP7[^]

[GuyThiebaut]

Yes there are better ways of representing the data - it all depends on what you are going to do with it. If you are just looking at a simple full table scan then a wide row can be the best approach. The difficulty is that when you design your tables inevitably six months later there will be a better way to store the data based on how you now want to query it. In the end you just do the best you can with the information you have at the time and rely on the database engine to do the optimisation for you later - if things get really slow you can always de-normalise your data...

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

― Christopher Hitchens

[Lost User]

Vasily Tserekh wrote:

I have a table in the application i am developing of 155 columns i dare anyone to beat me:mad:
ps. the table is already in 3rd normal form

155 attributes, all depending on the same key? And none that depend on a part of the key? No repeating groups? All atomic values? Show me :)

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

[Mycroft Holmes]

I needed to supply some data to a stress test system using SQL 2005, ran out of columns when I hit 1200, I was hoping to create a temp table with 3.6k columns because I could then use my nifty table to CSV utility. Devised a different strategy. I have seen many systems with over 200 columns in a table, usually legacy apps that migrated from power users to core system somehow.

Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

[Matt Gullett]

We have plenty of 3rd normal tables with more than 1024 columns (they are split across multiple tables). Market research surveys have a large number of data points sometimes.

[Vasily Tserekh]

its an inspection form and every value its a part of the inspection list

[Lost User]

That's not an argument. I can show you a lot forms crammed with unrelated data - I want to see 155 attributes in 3NF, and them being in the same form doesn't necessarily mean that they should be in the same table. Simply listing their names will do :)

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

[Lost User]

If it's that easy, then why do we rarely see a decently normalized database? OT; From the third, you'd go to BCNF. I don't see much added value in removing the optional fields.

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

[TheRealRarius]

I just looked in the standatd demo database for Sage 200 accounts... There are four tables with over 100 columns and one with 427! This table is called setup and stores one record containing a load of the system settings for the application. God I love (not) Sage!