| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Billions of records? |
| Date: | 2003-07-16 22:07:22 |
| Message-ID: | 25467.1058393242@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 07:53:37PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>> Each tuple in postgresql has around 28 bytes of overhead. Index tuple has 12
> Is this accurate?
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/view.php?version=7.3&idoc=1&file=page.html
> indicates a per-tuple overhead of 23 bytes. Or have things changed in
> 7.4?
He's probably assuming you are using OIDs (which is the default).
> BTW, is there any documentation on the structure of index pages?
Same as heap pages...
http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/page.html
The index tuple header layout is different from heap tuple headers,
but the other info on that page applies.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-16 22:27:28 | Re: Postgresql "FIFO" Tables, How-To ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-16 22:01:57 | Re: Install new language - Prev: Re: Are you frustrated with PostgreSQL |