Re: quick question: index optimisations on small tables
От | Arne Weiner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: quick question: index optimisations on small tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3B8E734E.9BCA69E7@gmx.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | quick question: index optimisations on small tables ("Andrew Snow" <andrew@modulus.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: quick question: index optimisations on small tables
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Andrew Snow wrote: > > If I have: > > CREATE TABLE small ( > key integer PRIMARY KEY, > value text > ); > > and assuming there are only enough rows to fit in one page, doesn't it > make sense to use the index instead of a seq. scan for queries of type > > SELECT value FROM small WHERE key = 12345; > Since you have declared the column 'key' as PRIMARY KEY there is an index on column 'key' anyway and SELECT value FROM small where key = 12345 will use that index: on my system psql said: omicron=# EXPLAIN SELECT value FROM small WHERE key = 12345; NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: Index Scan using small_pkey on small (cost=0.00..8.14 rows=10 width=12) > Since it can get the answer straight out of the index, and if there are > potentially numerous rows, looking up a b-tree is faster than a linear > search? Looking up from an index is of course faster than a seq. scan (in almost all cases). Arne. > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: