On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Jeff Gentry <jgentry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi there ... > > I recently discovered that there is a hard cap on the # of columns, being > at 1600. I also understand that it is generally unfathomable that anyone > would ever feel limited by that number ... however I've managed to bump > into it myself and was looking to see if anyone had advice on how to > manage the situation. The generic solution without making too much work is to store similar data types in an arrayed type in the db.
