Re: number of rows estimation for bit-AND operation - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: number of rows estimation for bit-AND operation
Date
Msg-id dcc563d10908201832u85305ebg93d014e355a34f@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to number of rows estimation for bit-AND operation  (Slava Moudry <smoudry@4info.net>)
Responses Re: number of rows estimation for bit-AND operation  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
2009/8/20 Slava Moudry <smoudry@4info.net>:
> Hi,
> Yes, I thought about putting the bit-flags in separate fields.
> Unfortunately - I expect to have quite a lot of these and space is an issue when you are dealing with billions of
recordsin fact table, so I prefer to pack them into one int8. 

For giggles I created two test tables, one with a single int, one with
8 bools, and put 100M entries in each.  The table with 8 bools took up
aprrox. 3560616 bytes, while the one with a single int took up approx.
3544212

I.e they're about the same.  You should really test to see if having a
lot of bools costs more than mangling ints around.  I'm guessing I
could fit a lot more bools in the test table due to alignment issues
than just 8.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Chris
Date:
Subject: Re: improving my query plan
Next
From: Scott Carey
Date:
Subject: Re: improving my query plan