Re: FTS GIN Index Question
От | Christian Ramseyer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FTS GIN Index Question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4CA372DE.6050802@networkz.ch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FTS GIN Index Question (Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 09/29/2010 12:10 PM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > Christian, > > On Wed, 29 Sep 2010, Christian Ramseyer wrote: > >> Hi List >> >> I have a largish partitioned table, it has ~60 million records in each >> of 12 partitions. It appears that a Full Text Index could speed up >> some user queries a lot. >> >> A quick test with an additional tsvector column revealed that this >> would take up around 35 GB of space for this column and then maybe 5 >> more for the gin index on it. As this is a lot of space (~ 480 GB), >> I'm a bit tempted to use a gin index without the separate tsvector >> column. However, the doc says that this will be slower. > > do you have problem with disk space ? Searching index is usually very fast > operation, only small part of index readed. Did you checked time to read > index ? > Hi Oleg, thanks for your reply, Well I could get the disk space, but it's on a corporate SAN so it's a bit tedious. I didn't compare directly so far since even creating both index versions for only a single partition would bring me close to the space limit and also take maybe 20 hours or so. So my idea was to ask here first if I'm looking at a "a few percent" or a "orders of magnitude" difference. But of course, if there isn't enough feeback for an informed decision I'll either try both or just go with the space-intensive variant to be on the safe side, user experience is certainly more important than disk usage. Christian
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: