Re: Does max size of varchar influence index size - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Richard Huxton
Subject Re: Does max size of varchar influence index size
Date
Msg-id 486A4E62.40502@archonet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Does max size of varchar influence index size  (Franck Routier <franck.routier@axege.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Franck Routier wrote:
> Le lundi 30 juin 2008 à 13:24 -0700, Mark Roberts a écrit :
>
> Hi Mark,
>
>> Is there any particular reason that you're not using a surrogate key?
>
> Well, human readability is the main reason, no standard way to handle
> sequences between databases vendors being the second... (and also
> problems when copying data between different instances of the database).
>
> So surrogate keys could be a way, and I am considering this, but I'd
> rather avoid it :)

Might be worth looking at 8.3 - that can save you significant space with
short varchar's - the field-length is no longer fixed at 32 bits but can
  adjust itself automatically. Apart from the overheads, you need the
space to store the text in each string, not the maximum possible.

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Peter Schuller
Date:
Subject: Re: VACUUM ANALYZE blocking both reads and writes to a table
Next
From: "samantha mahindrakar"
Date:
Subject: Select running slow on Postgres