More tables vs fewer tables, question of efficiency

[RopeADope]

Hi all.

 

I've got a database still in the development stage.  The structure was already in place and my job at the moment is to convert it from MS Access to MySQL.  My question is one of structure and efficiency.  Currently, there's in the neighborhood of 26 tables, of this number there are two main types(with various sub-types), the 13 obj tables and 13 min tables.  My thought is to combine the 13 obj tables and 13 min tables to 1 obj table and 1 min table(foregoing the sub-types).  So my question is...

 

Is it more manageable/efficient to have more tables with fewer data entries, or fewer tables with more data entries?

[freelance84]

Hey,

 

I had a similar question a month back. I had a look thorugh my posts but can't find the thread.

 

Basically the answer was to have fewer tables, something about the program not having to back out of one table and then into another means the program can run faster.

 

Obviously it isn't possible to combine some tables as the data stored is totally different.

 

Hope that helps

[RopeADope]

Hey,

 

I had a similar question a month back. I had a look thorugh my posts but can't find the thread.

 

Basically the answer was to have fewer tables, something about the program not having to back out of one table and then into another means the program can run faster.

 

Obviously it isn't possible to combine some tables as the data stored is totally different.

 

Hope that helps

 

It does, thanks.  I've done some more research since posting and what I've found is basically that new computers are so fast, searching a few thousand+ records is quicker than searching a few thousand+ tables.