| From: | "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | mark overmeer <markovermeer(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: schema design question |
| Date: | 2007-08-19 18:26:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20070819182658.GC25214@uio.no |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 11:12:16AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> There's your mistake. EAV is not performant, and won't become so.
It sort of depends. I put all the EXIF information for my image gallery into
an EAV table -- it was the most logical format at the time, although I'm not
sure I need all the information. Anyhow, with clustering and indexes,
Postgres zips through the five million records easily enough for my use -- at
least fast enough that I can live with it without feeling the need for a
redesign.
As a general database design paradigm, though, I fully agree with you.
Databases are databases, not glorified OO data stores or hash tables.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2007-08-19 18:41:15 | Re: schema design question |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2007-08-19 18:12:16 | Re: schema design question |