Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vApQJ-006NIw-GD for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:55:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vApQI-0004zy-GE for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:55:37 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vApQI-0004zq-5q for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:55:37 +0000 Received: from mail.appl-ecosys.com ([50.126.108.78]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vApQF-003ET6-0F for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:55:36 +0000 Received: from salmo.appl-ecosys.com (salmo.appl-ecosys.com [192.168.55.1]) by mail.appl-ecosys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379B82A14D6 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 05:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 05:55:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Shepard To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Arrays vs separate tables In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <95de5a9b-4dd8-2f7-6e12-98c3d72c52@appl-ecosys.com> References: <162e5330-861c-ecc7-45c1-aaa1aff26c88@appl-ecosys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Mon, 20 Oct 2025, Peter J. Holzer wrote: > * Simplicity: If a set of values is always fetched together and updated > together, you might as well treat it as a unit and not split it over > multiple tables > The second may be relevant for you. If you always display and edit the > phone numbers of a contact together and your frontend makes it easier to > edit an array than a subset of rows from a table, you might just stuff > them into a table and ignore "purity". Peter, Thank you. That's my use case. Regards, Rich