Re: Serious performance problem
От | Horst Herb |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Serious performance problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20011031033311.4792.qmail@gnumed.dhs.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Serious performance problem ("Tille, Andreas" <TilleA@rki.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Serious performance problem
Re: Serious performance problem |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday 31 October 2001 03:13, you wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Alex Pilosov wrote: > As I said all this wouln´t be a problem for my application. I just > run a sequential insert of data each night. Then the database is read > only. > > Does anybody see chances that 'index coverage' would be implemented into > 7.2. This would be a cruxial feature for my application. If it will Andreas, I have the feeling that your problem is solved best by taking a different approach. As A. Pilosovs posting pointed out, index coverage is a problem intrinsic to the MVCC implementation (IMHO a small price to pay for a priceless feature). I can't see why much effort should go into a brute force method to implement index coverage, if your problem can be solved more elegant in a different way. With the example you posted, it is essentially only simple statistics you want to run on tables where the *majority* of records would qualify in your query. Why not create an extra "statistics" table which is updated automatically through triggers in your original table? That way, you will always get up-to-date INSTANT query results no matter how huge your original table is. And, don't forget that the only way MS SQL can achieve the better performance here is through mercilessly hogging ressources. In a complex database environment with even larger tables, the performance gain in MS SQL would be minimal (my guess). Horst
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: