Re: index speed-up and automatic tables/procedures creation
От | Jean-Yves F. Barbier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: index speed-up and automatic tables/procedures creation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B0FEA8C.3040803@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: index speed-up and automatic tables/procedures creation (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
Tom Lane a écrit : ... > I think you're wasting your time. What you are setting out to do here > is manually emulate the top layer or so of a large index. Unless you > have very specific (and unusual) data access patterns that you know in > considerable detail, this is not a game you are going to win. Just go > with the one big table and one index, you'll be happier. (Note that > "several million rows" is not big, it's barely enough to notice.) > > You will see a lot of discussion about partitioning of tables if you > look around the list archives, but this is not done with the idea that > it makes access to any one row faster. The biggest motivation usually > is to allow dropping ranges of data cheaply, like throwing away a month's > or year's worth of old data at once. Just to make sure I understood the spirit: * I keep a large table, * As my join tables have just (pkey=pkeys from each side), I also make indexes on each foreign pkey, * (May be?) I also make partial indexes, in order to have ie a faster retrieve of not-sold items instead of excluding sold items in the query JY -- -- I have seen the FUN --
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: