On 16.02.2011 20:26, Mark Phippard wrote: > 2011/2/16 Branko Čibej <br...@e-reka.si>: > >> My not very humble opinion -- we can play silly buggers trying to >> optimize this bit of the query, but effort would be better spent in >> merging NODES and ACTUAL_NODE, which in turn would allow us to drop the >> second query altogether and halve the total time needed to populate the >> cache table. > Are you interested in doing this and just seeing if there are objections? > > You have brought it up a couple times and no one is responding. If > you think there might be objections maybe it needs a new thread? If > it delivers a performance win then I think we should do it. I do not > think null column values are going to waste enough disk space to be a > concern.
I'd love to, but that would be biting off more than I have time to chew on right now. Yes, I know that throwing suggestions (and patches) over the wall is not very constructive, but that's the best I can do in my copious free time. -- Brane
