Re: Using array instead of sub table (storage and speed)

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Lutz Fischer <l(dot)fischer(at)ed(dot)ac(dot)uk>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Using array instead of sub table (storage and speed)
Date: 2017-06-16 12:05:37
Message-ID: 20170616120537.GJ1769@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Greeting, Lutz!

Please don't top-post on the PG mailing lists, our style is to relpy
in-line.

* Lutz Fischer (l(dot)fischer(at)ed(dot)ac(dot)uk) wrote:
> I often need some data from [s] where I don't care about [sp]. So in
> how far does having these arrays a part of [s] would make these
> queries slower. Or would be better to store the array data in a
> separate table e.g. have [s] as it is now but turn [sp] into an
> array aggregated table.

If that's the case then you would probably be better off putting the
arrays into an independent table, yes.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tieson Molly 2017-06-20 11:51:06 substring index what is better way to query
Previous Message Lutz Fischer 2017-06-16 10:37:47 Re: Using array instead of sub table (storage and speed)