| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Seamus Abshere <seamus(at)abshere(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: "Shared strings"-style table |
| Date: | 2017-10-13 16:12:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbZ7ji_h=2vgc-sEWp9niTDf2OUgBfD1JSdRmDvBKKb1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Seamus Abshere <seamus(at)abshere(dot)net> wrote:
> Theoretically / blue sky, could there be a table or column type that
> transparently handles "shared strings" like this, reducing size on disk
> at the cost of lookup overhead for all queries?
>
> (I guess maybe it's like TOAST, but content-hashed and de-duped and not
> only for large objects?)
>
Row-independence is baked into PostgreSQL pretty deeply...
I think an enum type is about as close are you are likely to get if you
don't wish to setup your own foreign-key relationships with surrogate keys.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Seamus Abshere | 2017-10-13 16:29:13 | Re: "Shared strings"-style table |
| Previous Message | Rob Sargent | 2017-10-13 16:09:05 | Re: "Shared strings"-style table |