Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD062476353 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 11:20:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from email04.aon.at (WARSL402PIP5.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.79]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5403247621C for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 11:20:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 367988 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2002 15:20:09 -0000 Received: from m165p018.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) ([62.46.10.146]) (envelope-sender ) by qmail5rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 7 Oct 2002 15:20:09 -0000 From: Manfred Koizar To: shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-general , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Large databases, performance Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 17:22:41 +0200 Message-ID: References: <3DA1A331.21316.F7E742B@localhost> <69v2qu4n8fdt5do8dids2a9m98p0q8bu9r@4ax.com> <3DA1E50F.4394.107FF85D@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3DA1E50F.4394.107FF85D@localhost> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200210/389 X-Sequence-Number: 31387 On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 19:48:31 +0530, "Shridhar Daithankar" wrote: >I say if it's a char field, there should be no indicator of length as it's not >required. Just store those many characters straight ahead.. This is out of reach for a quick hack ... >Sure. But the server machine is not available this week. Some other project is >using it. So the results won't be out unless at least a week from now. :-) >This time results are correct. Postgresql loads data faster, indexes it faster >and queries in almost same time.. Way to go.. Great! And now let's work on making selects faster, too. Servus Manfred