Lester Caine wrote:

> Alexandre Benson Smith wrote:
>
>> Lester Caine wrote:
>>
>>> One thought would be - is the message content in a large character field
>>> or in a blob? keeping large text fields in blobs helps in these sorts of
>>> cases as the actual record can be a lot smaller, and more will fit on a
>>> 'page' in storage. You only need to access the 'content' once you have
>>> identified the header records.
>>>
>>>
>> Bu we must remember that small BLOB's that fits on the page are stored
>> directly with the record...
>>
>
> How many emails are small these days ;)
>

Well, that depends on the kind of message... Text only e-mail are still
short theses days... :)

> But I would be interested to see some comments about the possible speed
> advantages of the core data being in small length records, with details
> like the full email address and the like in a secondary table and
> content in blobs.
>
> I prefer to use numeric 'user_ids' and similar more 'relational'
> processing to keep the big tables as 'tight as possible. No need to have
> a 256 character email field when a bigint to another table will do the
> same job? In Elric's case, the subject field is probably best in the the
> main record, but the sender and recipient fields may be better as simple
> id's where you are only looking for a sender view or a recipient view?
>

I'd like this approach too.


--
Alexandre Benson Smith
Development
THOR Software e Comercial Ltda
Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil
www.thorsoftware.com.br