Re: postgresql storage and performance questions

Josh Harrison escribió:

> > On 11/19/07, Josh Harrison <joshques(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > I have 2 tables with 2 cols each( 1 numeric(8,0) and 1 varchar(3) ).
> > > In table1 both the cols are filled and in table2 the varchar colm is null

> There were a couple of things we noted.
> 1. Tablesize twice as much than oracle-- Im not sure if postgres null
> columns has any overhead since we have lots of null columns in our
> tables.Does postgresql has lots of overhead for null columns?

No, NULLs are stored as a bitmap for each tuple and they are quite
efficient.

Probably the reason for the difference is the numeric field which Oracle
may be optimizing as a plain integer. Did you try declaring the column
as INTEGER in Postgres?

Please do not top-post.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"Everything that I think about is more fascinating than the crap in your head."
(Dogbert's interpretation of blogger philosophy)