On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:05:52PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Anyway you are just moving the storage somewhere else -- instead of > having 4 fields in the tuple itself, you have one field which points > the same 4 fields elsewhere. I don't see how is that a win; it's > actually worse because you have to do two lookups. (And actually you > have just enlarged the storage requirements because you need to store > the "vis_id" twice.)
It would only be of use if the table had few transactions in it; in other words, if it was mostly read-only. For a true read-only table there are other options people have suggested that are probably better. BTW, this becomes even more attractive if vis_id is int2; in that case you can keep the entire mapping in memory in ~1MB. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
