Re: Any better plan for this query?..

Dimitri wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> yes, you detailed very well the problem! :-)
> all those CHAR columns are so just due historical issues :-) as well
> they may contains anything else and not only numbers, that's why..
> Also, all data inside are fixed, so VARCHAR will not save place, or
> what kind of performance issue may we expect with CHAR vs VARCHAR if
> all data have a fixed length?..

None in postgres, but the char/varchar thing may or may not bite you at
some point later - sounds like you have it covered though.

> It's 2 times faster on InnoDB, and as it's just a SELECT query no need
> to go in transaction details :-)

Total runtime: 1.442 ms
(10 rows)

You posted a query that's taking 2/1000's of a second. I don't really
see a performance problem here :)

--
Postgresql & php tutorials
http://www.designmagick.com/