Re: fixed size columns - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: fixed size columns
Date
Msg-id 19851.1051678551@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to fixed size columns  (elein <elein@sbcglobal.net>)
Responses Re: fixed size columns  (elein <elein@sbcglobal.net>)
List pgsql-general
elein <elein@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> I have a very long, very narrow table that is taking up a few gigabytes.
> The table is defined with varchar(n) fields and some character(n) fields.
> I am assuming that the majority of all fields are filled.

> Are these rows being stored on disk as aligned varlenas? Can I squish out some
> space by arranging the columns to groups of 8 bytes? Or is each column
> aligned separately on a new 8 byte boundary?  Or is this a futile exercise?

Those fields will be aligned on 4-byte boundaries within a row.
Depending on your machine architecture, the total length of a row might
be constrained to an 8-byte multiple or a 4-byte multiple.

My guess is that you'd be spending your time more productively by
figuring a way to make the table less narrow.  PG's 28-or-more-byte
overhead per row is usually bad news for narrow table designs, long
before you worry about alignment.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimizer not using index on 120M row table
Next
From: "Ron Mayer"
Date:
Subject: Re: dump/restore to 7.4devel giving "[archiver (db)] error returned by PQputline"