Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Manfred Koizar" <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-general" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance
Date: 2002-10-07 15:42:12
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4887A5A@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance


> if i'm not mistaken, a char(n)/varchar(n) column is stored as a 32-bit
> integer specifying the length followed by as many characters as the
> length tells. On 32-bit Intel hardware this structure is aligned on a
> 4-byte boundary.

Yes.

> | opc0 char (3) no no 8 4
> | opc1 char (3) no no 8 4
> | opc2 char (3) no no 8 4

> Hackers, do you think it's possible to hack together a quick and dirty
> patch, so that string length is represented by one byte? IOW can a
> database be built that doesn't contain any char/varchar/text value
> longer than 255 characters in the catalog?

Since he is only using fixchar how about doing a fixchar implemetation, that
does not store length at all ? It is the same for every row anyways !

Andreas

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jean-Luc Lachance 2002-10-07 16:11:35 Re: Efficient date range search?
Previous Message Michelle Konzack 2002-10-07 15:31:51 Re: Case insensitive columns

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-10-07 16:18:46 Re: Moving to PostGres
Previous Message Antti Haapala 2002-10-07 15:38:47 Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marie G. Tuite 2002-10-07 19:22:09 sloooow query
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2002-10-07 15:22:41 Re: Large databases, performance