Re: Best way to "add" columns
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>, Marten Feldtmann <marten@feki.toppoint.de>, Jesse Scott <jscott@bmi.net>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: 2000-05-16T14:46:13Z
Lists: pgsql-general
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com> writes: > > Marten Feldtmann wrote: > >> The varable lengths columns should be at the end of the row, therefore > >> it does not seem to be good to add an integer column after a varchar > >> column. > > > 1. Is this true? Should variable length column really be at the end > > of a row? > > There is some microscopic performance advantage if you put fixed-width > columns before variable-width columns: columns that are at a fixed > offset in the table records don't require scanning through earlier > columns to access. But I'd be surprised if you could actually measure > any difference, unless perhaps on tables with hundreds of columns. > > > 2. If so, surly postgres can reorder tham internally so that on disk > > they are in the optimal format. > > There are notes in the source code indicating that the original > Berkeley Postgres crew thought about this and decided it wasn't > worth the trouble. Yes, agreed. Can anyone measure the difference. It would show up accessing columns past the variable length column. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026