Re: How much size saved by updating column to NULL ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: How much size saved by updating column to NULL ?
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwYq2YF7dX0CvkoGJQze76J2hZx5Zima47AxabpiO+GQig@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to How much size saved by updating column to NULL ?  (Sébastien TANIERE <seb.taniere@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Friday, January 12, 2024, Sébastien TANIERE <seb.taniere@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
in my company, some columns rarely used in a PG database 14.8 have been set to NULL in order to save disk space (datecreation & acteurcreation in following table) .

create table example
(
 id                  varchar(25) not null,
    datecreation        timestamp(6),
    acteurcreation      varchar(50),
    valeurunit          smallint
)

I am wondering if it is really useful for every type of column. 
Intuitively, i would say that it does not save space for fixed field datecreation as it is a fixed size column.

Do we save 8 bytes by timestamp column updated to NULL or not ?


You probably should just measure it yourself.  But yes, the representation of null in a tuple is the absence of data and a bit in the nulls bitmap.  So there is overhead but also savings.  The net effect is case specific.

David J.
 

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Jeremiah Bauer
Date:
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: Refresh Materialized View Issue
Next
From: Kiran K V
Date:
Subject: Issue with loading unicode characters with copy command