Re: [OT] "advanced" database design (long)

"Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> writes:

> On Feb 3, 2008 10:14 PM, Alex Turner <armtuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> give you a lot less  pages to load than building a table with say 90 columns
>> in it that are all null, which would result in better rather than worse
>> performance?

Fwiw Postgres stores NULLs quite efficiently. Those 90 columns, all of which
are null would take 12 bytes.

> But you're giving us a choice between two bad methodologies.

But I probably agree with Scott. It depends though. There are cases which are
inherently awkward for which you will end up with either EAV or 90 mostly NULL
columns.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!