From: | David Link <dlink(at)soundscan(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: DECODE |
Date: | 2001-11-05 15:49:38 |
Message-ID: | 3BE6B512.FAB9DF2E@soundscan.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> David,
>
> > You don't think having a separate reference table for each code
> > lookup
> > -- that is, making the datamodel more fully normalized will not
> > impact
> > performance? Probably nominally because there will be so few rows in
> > them.
>
> It will impact performance no more than, and perhaps less than,
> evaluating a multi-stage CASE statement for each row in the query. And
> this kind of performance concern is only an issue if you're trying to
> run a public web site on budget hardware ... otherwise, the other
> elements of your system will be more of a bottleneck than the query
> parser! I regularly use queries and views that involve 6-9 tables,
> three UNIONS, and two sub-selects in each UNION ... and still get a 2-3
> second response time on the 500mhz Celeron production machine.
Thanks. Good advice.
Question: How big are those tables you're joining and uniting? (disk
size, and number of rows).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert J. Sanford, Jr. | 2001-11-05 16:08:55 | Re: Book reviews are up |
Previous Message | Vandana Sudheer | 2001-11-04 12:52:30 | libpqc++ Cursor/Select |