Number of Table Fields

[DS]

Is a 25 field table going to be slower than a 16 field table? I have a 2
tables but its looking better if I have both tables into one, thus the
25 field table. Is that too many fields in a table?
Thanks
DS

 

[Jeff Boyce]

Several considerations...

Unless you are talking about millions of rows, a well-normalized,
properly-indexed table with 25 fields will "perform" as well as one with 16
fields (more or less). This is assuming that you are NOT trying to return
all 25 fields and all million rows vs only 16 fields and million rows -- of
course that would take longer, as there is more to retrieve.

"It is looking better" is a bit ambiguous. Do you mean the performance is
better using a single table, or that the "beauty" of the design is prettier?
P.S. the latter is NOT a reason for combining tables in a relational
database like Access.

If you are counting fields, you are focused on a distraction. To come up
with a good, well-normalized relational database structure, you need to
focus on the entities and relationships. If these terms are unfamiliar,
turn off your PC, grab paper and pencil, and start mapping out the things
(person, place, ...- these will be tables) about which you wish to record
facts (also known as "attributes" ... the fields in the tables). For
support reading, check Jeff Conrad's site:
http://home.bendbroadband.com/conradsystems/accessjunkie/resources.html


Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

 

[DS]

Several considerations...

Unless you are talking about millions of rows, a well-normalized,
properly-indexed table with 25 fields will "perform" as well as one with 16
fields (more or less). This is assuming that you are NOT trying to return
all 25 fields and all million rows vs only 16 fields and million rows -- of
course that would take longer, as there is more to retrieve.

"It is looking better" is a bit ambiguous. Do you mean the performance is
better using a single table, or that the "beauty" of the design is prettier?
P.S. the latter is NOT a reason for combining tables in a relational
database like Access.

If you are counting fields, you are focused on a distraction. To come up
with a good, well-normalized relational database structure, you need to
focus on the entities and relationships. If these terms are unfamiliar,
turn off your PC, grab paper and pencil, and start mapping out the things
(person, place, ...- these will be tables) about which you wish to record
facts (also known as "attributes" ... the fields in the tables). For
support reading, check Jeff Conrad's site:
http://home.bendbroadband.com/conradsystems/accessjunkie/resources.html


Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

Thanks Jeff, thats a good link! I appreciate the input. And yes I'm
going to 25 Fields. It justseems to work better!
Once agai Thank you.
DS