From: | Peter Bex <Peter(dot)Bex(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Tuple storage overhead |
Date: | 2010-04-20 09:05:05 |
Message-ID: | 20100420090505.GJ11616@frohike.homeunix.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:28:36AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> If you are storing big data and want to keep the overhead low, the
> first thing you need to examine is organizing your data into arrays.
> This involves tradeoffs of course and may not work but it's worth a
> shot!
That does sound interesting. However, I'm storing several hundreds or
thousands of data points (depending on the data set). How is Postgresql's
overhead when it comes to extracting one or two items from an array in
a query?
Cheers,
Peter
--
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
experience much like composing poetry or music."
-- Donald Knuth
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2010-04-20 09:42:58 | Re: Ltree - how to sort nodes on parent node |
Previous Message | Peter Bex | 2010-04-20 09:01:03 | Re: Tuple storage overhead |