Re: Faster data type for one-length values
От | André Volpato |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Faster data type for one-length values |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46545893.2030601@ecomtecnologia.com.br обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Faster data type for one-length values (André Volpato<andre.volpato@ecomtecnologia.com.br>) |
Ответы |
Re: Faster data type for one-length values
|
Список | pgsql-general |
André Volpato escreveu: > Tom Lane escreveu: >> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Volpato?= <andre.volpato@ecomtecnologia.com.br> writes: >> >>> I need to store one-length values like '1', '2', '3' or '4' . >>> >> >> >>> Today, this field is indexed with btree and is of type smallint (int2). >>> How much performance will be improved if I change it to "char" (1 byte >>> length) ? >>> >> >> The improvement will be zero. Because of alignment restrictions, you >> don't save any space from making an index entry smaller than 4 bytes. >> >> If you have several such fields adjacent in a table row, making them all >> narrower can save space, but it doesn't help for standalone index >> entries. >> >> regards, tom lane >> Tom, The ammount of space saved seems pretty clear to me. What are you saying is that the index behaviour is the same, for all types smaller than 4 bytes ? For query performance, in a search is based on that standalone indexed field, would be any difference using : a. char(1) ; b. int2; c. "char" Thanks again ! Andre Volpato
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: