Ned Batchelder said:
> That's not "good database design", it's relational dogma.
You are correct, it is indeed relational dogma. My appologies, it's
merely a knee-jerk response from having to support a legacy database
that's not going away for many years that was designed by relational
nkinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/02/17 Thu PM 04:01:53 EST
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] BLOB versus table storage
>
> Clay Dowling wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> >
> >
> >>CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER
nkinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/02/17 Thu PM 04:01:53 EST
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] BLOB versus table storage
>
> Clay Dowling wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> >
> >
> >>CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER
to process entire
polygons, storing them in a blob will be a better solution.
--Ned.
http://nedbatchelder.com
-Original Message-
From: Clay Dowling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 2:28 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] BLOB versus table storag
Clay Dowling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, externalref INTEGER,
pointcount INTEGER, pointlist BLOB)
When I insert data to this table, I have to write a binary list of x,y
coordinates in a sequential memory region before storing in the database.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, externalref INTEGER,
> pointcount INTEGER, pointlist BLOB)
>
> When I insert data to this table, I have to write a binary list of x,y
> coordinates in a sequential memory region before storing in the database.
> Getting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have a recommendation as to which solution would be more optimal, both for space and processing time?
Perhaps you should consider using Postgres. It has builtin support for
polygons. It can index polygon columns. And it includes some builtin
functions to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a fairly simple database design with a series of tables that reference
graphical data. Currently, there is one table that contains the following:
CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, externalref INTEGER, pointcount
INTEGER, pointlist BLOB)
When I insert
qlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] BLOB versus table storage
>
> On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 10:12 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Does anyone have a recommendation as to which solution
> would be more
> > optimal, both for space and processing time? In a worst case
> &g
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 10:12 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does anyone have a recommendation as to which solution would be more
> optimal, both for space and processing time? In a worst case
> scenario, I could insert over 1 million polygons, resulting in a max
> 20 million point list table.
>
I have a fairly simple database design with a series of tables that reference
graphical data. Currently, there is one table that contains the following:
CREATE TABLE polygons (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, externalref INTEGER, pointcount
INTEGER, pointlist BLOB)
When I insert data to this table, I
11 matches
Mail list logo
