From: Chris Hoover <revoohc@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Admin <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: What is the difference in storage between a blank string and null?
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:02:36 -0400
Message-ID: <1d219a6f0804111302r4adaf97dn4ecb0549c5ae85dc@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
I'm doing some testing on how to decrease our database size as I work on a
partitioning scheme.
I have found that if I have the database store all empty strings as nulls, I
get a significant savings over saving them as blank strings (i.e. '').
Below is an example of savings I am seeing for the same table:
In my test case, storing empty strings give me a table size of 20,635,648
Storing empty strings as nulls gives me a table size of: 5,742,592.
As you can see, storing empty strings as nulls is saving me approximately
72% on this table. So, I am wanting to understand what Postgres is doing
differently with the nulls. Would someone kindly enlighten me on this.
(P.S. I am using a nullif(trim(column),'') in my partition and view rules to
store the nulls, and coalesce(column,'') to give my application the data
back without nulls.)
Thanks,
Chris
PG 8.1
--
Tired of HIGH Gas prices? Visit http://colafuelguy.mybpi.com to start
saving at the pump no matter where you live!
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: revoohc@gmail.com
Subject: Re: What is the difference in storage between a blank string and null?
In-Reply-To: <1d219a6f0804111302r4adaf97dn4ecb0549c5ae85dc@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox