Re: Partial indexes Vs standard indexes : Insert performance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: MaXX <bs139412(at)skynet(dot)be>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Partial indexes Vs standard indexes : Insert performance
Date: 2006-08-15 19:57:26
Message-ID: 19718.1155671846@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> But if you're just looking up a single record I wouldn't expect it to be much
> faster to look it up in the smaller partial index than in the larger index.
> Indexes find records in log(n) time and log() grows awfully slowly.

Yeah. Given the proportions mentioned in the original message, I think
one index on the whole table and one on just the ICMP records is
probably the best solution. A partial index covering most of a table is
not going to win enough to justify its maintenance overhead.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joseph Shraibman 2006-08-15 20:45:47 trigger speed
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-15 19:54:50 Re: