Thanks, naming conventions, and count()
От | Casey Lyon |
---|---|
Тема | Thanks, naming conventions, and count() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3AECC6B3.6090008@earthcars.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
First off I just wanted to give a big 'thank you' to all the developers and contributors who have made PostgreSQL what it is today. I haven't come across a single thing since my first experience with it a few years ago that hasn't been corrected, sped up, or otherwise postively enhanced! In working with 7.1 over the past couple weeks, I've noted the following mods may add to usability and speed: o v7.1 changed the database naming convention to be all numeric; I suggest having the DB engine create symbolic links whencreating a new DB and subsequent tables. For instance, in creating a database 'foo' with table 'bar' the /path/to/pgsql/data/base folder will have a new folder named something like '18720'; this folder could also have a symboliclink to 'foo'. Then in the '18720' folder rather than just having numeric files for each table, pk, index, etc. there could be symbolic links following the naming convention 'bar', 'pk_foo_pkey', 'field1_foo_ukey', 'field2_foo_key'. Maybe this would work best as configurable flag that could be set during compilation or in the conf file. o count() should use index scans for tables with a PK; scans would be on the PK index; even after running 'vacuum analyze'such a query still uses a sequential scan. For instance, "select count(*) from bar" and even "select(pk_name) frombar" both use sequential scans. Likewise, scans on fields with indexes should use the index. I hope this input is useful; keep up the excellent work, Casey Lyon Systems Engineer Earthcars.com, Inc www.earthcars.com casey@earthcars.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: