Melissa Star wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Do you know if a table with 480 fields will perform well, and whether it
>
> will cause a significant performance difference compared to an ordinary
> table with 20-30 fields?
>
> The table in questions needs to store time-related curve data,
> basically, five minute readings over a 24 hour interval.
>
> If the performance is not going to be acceptable with 480 columns, what
> would be the best solution to store the curve data?
>
> * A one to many relationship or design in which an entire 24 hours is
> not contained in one row may be impossibly slow, since the table will be
>
> accessed VERY frequently
>
> * Using Oracle 8i's array type?
>
> * Storing the full 24 hours of data at a BLOB and manipulating it
> oustide of Oracle only?
>
> Thanks everyone,
>
> Melissa Star
I am confident that if you run some benchmark studies you will find
that you can get better performance with the one-to-many table set
then with a single table with 480 columns. Don't forget that Oracle
has been designed to perform set operations extremely well and fast.
--
Jerry Gitomer
Once I learned how to spell DBA, I became one.
Received on Tue Jan 25 2000 - 00:07:55 CST
