| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, Michael Schmidt <MichaelMSchmidt(at)msn(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Field order |
| Date: | 2005-08-17 22:40:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20050817224034.GO95876@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 03:24:58PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 12:09:12 -0600,
> Michael Schmidt <MichaelMSchmidt(at)msn(dot)com> wrote:
> > I've searched the archives and found this question was asked in 2001 but never answered. Does the order of fields in a table make a difference? In Paradox (from whence I come), there was some belief that reliability was increased if memo (text) fields were placed at the end of the table. If field order does make a difference, does the EMS PostgreSQL manager "reorder" function physically rearrange the fields?
> >
> > Thanks for your time in considering this basic question
>
> Some space can be saved by putting the columns with the largest alignments
> first.
> The columns are not moved around to do the above, but are kept in the
> declared order.
Ugh, and here I'd been doing it the other way around. I assume
variable-length stuff should always go last, right?
This make sense?
Variable goes last, always
Larger alignment before smaller
NOT NULL before nullable
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dr NoName | 2005-08-17 22:43:33 | Re: COMMIT in ps output |
| Previous Message | Dr NoName | 2005-08-17 22:40:25 | test |