From: Chris Travers <chris@travelamericas.com>
To: Matt L. <survivedsushi@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: booleans and nulls
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:38:09 -0700
Message-ID: <43100A51.1040602@travelamericas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050821022557.21501.qmail@web35204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050821022557.21501.qmail@web35204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Matt L. wrote:
>Out of curiousity,
>
>1. Does a boolean column occupy 1byte of disk whether
>or not the value is null or not?
>
>
I believe so.
>2. Is matching on IS NULL or = 0 more efficient?
>
>
>
Hmm... = 0 is the same as IS FALSE. Not the same as IS NULL. So I
guess it is apples v. oranges....
>3. If I ix'd columns w/ null does postgres know
>whatevers not indexed is null or would their be no
>point?
>
>
>I currently utilize null fields as 'not a value' has
>meaning in a program i've been working on as I don't
>want to put false in every column when i only need a
>couple with a true/false value.
>
>I'm not joining tables on NULLS, just filtering w/
>them.
>
>
Sounds like a partial index would be your best bet. Something like:
CREATE index ON my_table WHERE my_bool IS NOT NULL
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: chris@travelamericas.com, survivedsushi@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: booleans and nulls
In-Reply-To: <43100A51.1040602@travelamericas.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