Re: indexes
От | Ben |
---|---|
Тема | Re: indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 67CB5A67-F61D-4C5D-B6B5-63330D89A940@silentmedia.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | indexes (Tom Allison <tom@tacocat.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: indexes
|
Список | pgsql-general |
It depends how it's going to be used. If you are going to reference this table in other tables a lot and/or rarely care about what the name actually is, then the two-column approach is going to be more efficient. Numbers are smaller and easier to compare than strings. On Nov 24, 2006, at 6:54 AM, Tom Allison wrote: > I notice a lot of places where people use the approach of creating > an index and a unique key like: > > CREATE TABLE foo ( > idx SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, > name varchar(32) UNIQUE NOT NULL > ) > > instead of > CREATE TABLE foo ( > name varchar(32) PRIMARY KEY > ) > > If the name is NEVER going to change, is there any advantage to > doing this? > If there are many-to-many reference tables (like name-to-friends) > is this any different? > > I've seen this a lot, but I've always assumed that with the > condition that 'name' would NEVER change, there was no advantage. > > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: