Database best practice: max number of columns
606667Jul 31 2009 — edited Jul 31 2009I have two questions that I would appreciate comments on...
We have a table titled TRANSACTION with 160 columns and a view titled TRANSACTIONS_VIEW with 233 columns in it. This was designed by someone a while ago. I am wondering if it is against best practice to have this many columns in a table? I have never before seen a table with this many columns in it and feel that there must be a way to split the data into multiple tables to make it more manageable.
My second question is on partitions, the above table TRANSACTION is partitioned by manually specifying partitions with max values on the transaction date starting august 2008 through january 2010 at 1 month increments. Isn't it much better to specify automatic partitioning using the interval clause?