On Friday 09 November 2001 12:23 am, Steve Meyers wrote:
> Tables with variable length rows can get ugly if not optimized
> frequently. We had one which was taking 2.5 sec to do an indexed query,
> and when we optimized the table it dropped to .2 sec.
>
> But as long as you keep your tables opti
>
> It won`t alway give you better performance. But take a table like this:
> (id int unsigned auto_increment,
> emailadress char(255)
> )
>
> Suppose the average emailadress is 30 characters. If you have more than a
> trivial amount of entrys you are wasting a lot of space. Space which all
> h
> > > So then is the real purpose of using varchars, to save disk space? ( I
> > > realize this is probably a general database question, just
> > trying to learn).
> >
> > + your datafile will be smaller which saves disk IO. In the end, the extra
> > cost of the less efficient index as less than
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 01:24:57AM +0100, Carsten H. Pedersen wrote:
> > > > But, it is all explaind in the manual :)
> > >
> > > Exactly where in the manual did you find that piece of information?
> >
> > 5.4.2 Get Your Data as Small as Possible
> ...
> >
> > But i read the advise literally so
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 12:46:33AM +0100, Carsten H. Pedersen wrote:
> >
> > + your datafile will be smaller which saves disk IO. In the end, the extra
> > cost of the less efficient index as less than the gain from the faster
> > access. So in the end you win speed.
>
> huh?
>
> With a variable
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 12:46:33AM +0100, Carsten H. Pedersen wrote:
> > > So then is the real purpose of using varchars, to save disk space? ( I
> > > realize this is probably a general database question, just
> > trying to learn).
> >
> > + your datafile will be smaller which saves disk IO. In
> > So then is the real purpose of using varchars, to save disk space? ( I
> > realize this is probably a general database question, just
> trying to learn).
>
> + your datafile will be smaller which saves disk IO. In the end, the extra
> cost of the less efficient index as less than the gain fro
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 05:46:35PM -0500, Tony wrote:
> On Thursday 08 November 2001 10:55 am, Paul DuBois wrote:
> > At 10:00 AM -0500 11/8/01, Tony wrote:
> > >Does anyone know if putting (or grouping) varchar columns at the end of a
> > >table provides any performance improvements? My indices
At 5:46 PM -0500 11/8/01, Tony wrote:
>On Thursday 08 November 2001 10:55 am, Paul DuBois wrote:
>> At 10:00 AM -0500 11/8/01, Tony wrote:
>> >Does anyone know if putting (or grouping) varchar columns at the end of a
>> >table provides any performance improvements? My indices are all integers,
On Thursday 08 November 2001 10:55 am, Paul DuBois wrote:
> At 10:00 AM -0500 11/8/01, Tony wrote:
> >Does anyone know if putting (or grouping) varchar columns at the end of a
> >table provides any performance improvements? My indices are all integers,
> >but not have varchar columns in between s
10 matches
Mail list logo
