| From: | Andrew Rawnsley <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: column size too large, is this a bug? |
| Date: | 2004-03-28 19:49:54 |
| Message-ID: | 15A45996-80F1-11D8-ADCF-000393A47FCC@ravensfield.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Well, I don't know if I would use it in an insert-heavy environment (at
least the way I implemented it), but for select-heavy
stuff I don't know why you would want to use anything else. Hard to
beat the performance of a simple BETWEEN.
On Mar 28, 2004, at 2:25 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Andrew,
>
>> I used to use the connect-by patch, but have since rewritten
>> everything
>> to use a nested set model.
>
> Cool! You're probably the only person I know other than me using
> nested sets
> in a production environment.
>
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
--------------------
Andrew Rawnsley
President
The Ravensfield Digital Resource Group, Ltd.
(740) 587-0114
www.ravensfield.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marcus Andree S. Magalhaes | 2004-03-29 10:57:43 | Re: postgres eating CPU on HP9000 |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-03-28 19:25:41 | Re: column size too large, is this a bug? |