| From: | Antti Haapala <antti(dot)haapala(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jason Hihn <jhihn(at)paytimepayroll(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Single Byte values |
| Date: | 2003-04-05 11:27:19 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.44.0304051408400.10368-100000@paju.oulu.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> So I assume use of this is 'safe'? Any degridation on performance?
Hmm.. I believe it isn't standard...
> It appears that this datatype is also array compatible, CREATE TABLE
test3(a
> "char"[4]); works!
>
> I guess if space is so important, I could also just store
> (char[0]<<8|char[1]) into a smallint...
It's often better use int4(8) than char(1) as (primary) keys.
pros: int4 uses _less_ space, not affected by locales, operations are
surely -faster-. Larger range of values. I believe even int8 is faster
than char(1) and not many applications are ever going to exhaust 2^63
keyvalues.
cons: integer values often aren't quite mnemonic.
--
Antti Haapala
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cristina Surroca | 2003-04-05 14:01:24 | Trying to Tunning DB |
| Previous Message | pilsl | 2003-04-05 09:24:58 | convert human searchpattern to postgres-search |