| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Planner question - "bit" data types |
| Date: | 2009-09-06 05:36:24 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150909052236k6df2a87cq1f4dd5b7af9003a2@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Karl Denninger<karl(at)denninger(dot)net> wrote:
> There was a previous thread and I referenced it. I don't have the other one
> in my email system any more to follow up to it.
>
> I give up; the attack-dog crowd has successfully driven me off. Ciao.
Another more standard sql approach is to push the flags out to a
subordinate table. This is less efficient of course but now you get
to use standard join tactics to match conditions...
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-07 01:25:23 | Re: slow query : very simple delete, 100% cpu, nearly no disk activity |
| Previous Message | Karl Denninger | 2009-09-06 00:19:04 | Re: Planner question - "bit" data types |