From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | AW: Please advise features in 7.1 (SUMMARY) |
Date: | 2000-11-28 16:19:45 |
Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368152@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I guess it depends on what you're using it for -- disk space
> is cheap and
> abundant anymore, I can see some advantages of having it
> computed only once
> rather than X times, where X is the number of SELECTs as that
> could get
> costly on really high traffic servers.. Costly not so much for simple
> computations like that but more complex ones.
Once and for all forget the argument in database technology, that disk space
is cheap in regard to $/Mb. That is not the question. The issue is:
1. amout of rows you can cache
2. number of rows you can read from disk per second
(note that it is not pages/sec)
3. how many rows you can sort in memory
In the above sence disk space is one of the most expensive things in a
database system. Saving disk space where possible will gain you drastic
performance advantages.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-11-28 16:23:10 | Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-28 16:14:59 | Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice |