| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Devik <devik(at)server(dot)cdi(dot)cz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan |
| Date: | 2000-10-17 14:28:28 |
| Message-ID: | 200010171428.KAA21254@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > > > I doubt everyone would like trading query speed for insert/update
> > > > > speed plus index size
> > > >
> > > > If he is scanning through the entire index, he could do a sequential
> > > > scan of the table, grab all the tid transaction status values, and use
> > > > those when viewing the index. No need to store/update the transaction
> > > > status in the index that way.
> > >
> > > Huh ? How ? It is how you do it now. Do you expect
> > > load several milion transaction statuses into memory,
> > > then scan index and lookup these values ?
> > > Missed I something ?
> > > devik
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Not sure. I figured they were pretty small values.
>
> IIRC the whole point was to avoid scanning the table ?
Yes, sorry.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-17 14:32:49 | Re: PL/Perl compilation error |
| Previous Message | Mark Hollomon | 2000-10-17 14:26:57 | Re: Re: New relkind for views |