Re: Is it reasonable to store double[] arrays of 30K elements - Mailing list pgsql-general

Hello

I worked with 80K float fields without any problem.

There are possible issues:

* needs lot of memory for detoast - it can be problem with more parallel queries

* there is a risk of possible repeated detost - some unhappy usage in plpgsql can be slow - it is solvable, but you have to identify this issue

* any update of large array is slow - so these arrays are good for write once data

Regards

Pavel

2014-02-14 23:07 GMT+01:00 lup <[hidden email]>:

Would 10K elements of float[3] make any difference in terms of read/write
performance?
Or 240K byte array?

Or are these all functionally the same issue for the server? If so,
intriguing possibilities abound. :)

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Is-it-reasonable-to-store-double-arrays-of-30K-elements-tp5790562p5792099.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Is-it-reasonable-to-store-double-arrays-of-30K-elements-tp5790562p5792144.html

To unsubscribe from Is it reasonable to store double[] arrays of 30K elements, click here.
NAML