From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Grega Jesih <Grega(dot)Jesih(at)actual-it(dot)si> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Docs <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: text fields and performance for ETL |
Date: | 2021-11-04 13:50:45 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbX37AwNcKHMeaOq+LS_nhw_6sHwaUK1+UsQ8Nuo7bcfg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Thursday, November 4, 2021, Grega Jesih <Grega(dot)Jesih(at)actual-it(dot)si> wrote:
>
> So why would it then be published ? Because inexperienced programmers take
> your statement that "it's the same performance" from a wrong perspective,
> so it would be fair to note, that the remark "it's the same performance" is
> meant "within any operation inside Postgres database". In the moment we
> want to take this data elsewhere,
>
> the problematic lack of model design comes out.
>
> If you wish to supply an actual patch for consideration I’d review it.
Absent that the documentation serves the vast majority of readers well
as-is. We’re entitled to a bit of self-centeredness here, especially when
the broader world is so varied.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Grega Jesih | 2021-11-05 09:51:08 | RE: text fields and performance for ETL |
Previous Message | Grega Jesih | 2021-11-04 07:15:49 | RE: text fields and performance for ETL |