From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | Houssay Guillaume <ghoussay(at)noos(dot)fr>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Data TYPE Creation |
Date: | 2003-03-17 14:42:05 |
Message-ID: | 6028.1047912125@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> Houssay Guillaume <ghoussay(at)noos(dot)fr> wrote:
>> What about the disk space ? By defining an INT2 with a constraint of 1 byte, how much space will be used in the memory (1 byte or 2 bytes). This is really one of my concern.
> The extra disc space won't be that much because there is other information
> being stored besides that raw data. So that int2 won't take up twice as much
> space as int1 (note postgres doesn't have that type).
If the OP is desperate to feel that he's saving space, there's always
the "char" type (note the quotes) --- it's got an impoverished set of
operations and the I/O format is maybe not quite what's wanted, but it
does store as a single byte.
But Bruno is correct to point out that actual space savings is another
question. Unless you have quite a few such columns appearing
consecutively in a table, it's not worth worrying about, because in any
context except adjacent "char" columns, the space will disappear into
alignment padding for the next field anyway.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dekkers Intermediair | 2003-03-17 14:53:58 | postgreSQL as MSSQL2000 server? |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-03-17 14:17:51 | Re: Data TYPE Creation |