Re: Questions about my strategy
От | Rob Brown-Bayliss |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Questions about my strategy |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1027988419.3063.7.camel@everglade.zoism.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Questions about my strategy (John Gray <jgray@azuli.co.uk>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 10:19, John Gray wrote: > Bear in mind that the PostgreSQL query optimiser is unlikely to use an > index if more than a few percent of the rows will be returned. If the > tuning parameters are set correctly, the index lookup should kick in > only when it would be faster[*]. If your stocktakes are equally > distributed amongst your transactions, then I suspect there would have > to be about 30 stocktakes (i.e. transactions partioned into about 30 > sets) before the index would be valuable. How frequent are stocktake > entries going to be compared to transactions? Basically they wont, after the stock has been counted a single transaction will be entered for each product, the count column being a correction, ie count = -4 if there are 4 items less tha nthere should be, 3 if more or 0 if the same. then the stocktake timestamp will be created and from then when looking up how many items in stock I will ignore all transactions older than the stocktake timestamp. > Of course, the only harm in creating an index is that it will slow > inserts down slightly. There have also been some suggestions that the > default btree index implementation in PG is not so efficient with > continuously increasing keys e.g. timestamps. I would like to hear more about index types, also what about clustering, I havn't readinto it yet, but understand it orders a table by the index, but then items inserted with a time stamp of the inestion will be automaitacally cluseterd by their time stamp wont they? (assuming I neve delete or update any rows) -- * * Rob Brown-Bayliss *
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: