From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | phillips(at)weatherbeeta(dot)com(dot)au |
Cc: | "'Aaron Bono'" <aaron(dot)bono(at)aranya(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: COPY to table with array columns (Longish) |
Date: | 2006-06-13 00:30:14 |
Message-ID: | 14241.1150158614@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
"Phillip Smith" <phillips(at)weatherbeeta(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> The whole sys file is variable length records like this - they range =
> from 1
> to over 17,000 fields per record.
17000? I think you really need to rethink your schema. While you could
theoretically drop 17000 elements into a PG array column, you wouldn't
like the performance --- it'd be almost unsearchable for instance.
I'd think about two tables, one with a single row for each SYS record
from the original, and one with one row for each detail item (the
invoice numbers in this case). With suitable indexes and a foreign key
constraint, this will perform a lot better than an array-based
translation.
And no, in neither case will you be able to import that file without
massaging it first.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aaron Bono | 2006-06-13 02:58:13 | Re: COPY to table with array columns (Longish) |
Previous Message | Phillip Smith | 2006-06-12 23:45:26 | Re: COPY to table with array columns (Longish) |