Re: [OT] "advanced" database design (long)

From: "Dawid Kuroczko" <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Alex Turner" <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [OT] "advanced" database design (long)
Date: 2008-02-04 09:03:47
Message-ID: 758d5e7f0802040103o76d9e96ay8c91c544172626b5@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Feb 4, 2008 5:14 AM, Alex Turner <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I"m not a database expert, but wouldn't
>
[...]
>
> give you a lot less pages to load than building a table with say 90 columns
> in it that are all null, which would result in better rather than worse
> performance?

Well, but PostgreSQL's NULLs occupy almost no space, or rather a bit of space,
that is one bit exactly. ;-) I am pretty much sure that storage-wise
looking NULLs
are more efficient.

Regards,
Dawid

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masse Jacques 2008-02-04 09:49:51 Re: [OT] "advanced" database design (long)
Previous Message Greg Smith 2008-02-04 06:30:41 Re: PostgreSQL Certification