From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
---|---|
To: | Edoardo Ceccarelli <eddy(at)axa(dot)it> |
Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [JDBC] [PERFORM] is a good practice to create an index on the |
Date: | 2004-04-28 08:32:23 |
Message-ID: | 20040428083223.GA8384@wolff.to |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-jdbc pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 10:13:14 +0200,
Edoardo Ceccarelli <eddy(at)axa(dot)it> wrote:
> do you mean that, declaring an index serial, I'd never have to deal with
> incrementing its primary key? good to know!
That isn't what is happening. Serial is a special type. It is int plus
a default rule linked to a sequence. No index is created by default
for the serial type. Declaring a column as a primary key will however
create a unique index on that column.
Also note that you should only assume that the serial values are unique.
(This assumes that you don't use setval and that you don't roll a sequence
over.) Within a single session you can assume the sequence values will
be monotonicly increasing. The values that end up in your table can have
gaps. Typically this happens when a transaction rolls back after obtaining
a new value from a sequence. It can also happen if you grab sequence
values in larger blocks (which might be more efficient if a session normally
acquires mulitple values from a particular sequence) than the default 1.
> anyway in this particular situation I don't need such accurate
> behaviour: this table is filled up with a lot of data twice per week and
> it's used only to answer queries.
> I could drop it whenever I want :)
You really don't want to use oids.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ben Kim | 2004-04-28 15:46:54 | parametrized query |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-04-28 08:25:26 | Re: [JDBC] [PERFORM] is a good practice to create an index on the |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brian Olson | 2004-04-28 15:26:35 | v3 from the ground up |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-04-28 08:25:26 | Re: [JDBC] [PERFORM] is a good practice to create an index on the |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-04-28 12:23:35 | Re: Simply join in PostrgeSQL takes too long |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-04-28 08:25:26 | Re: [JDBC] [PERFORM] is a good practice to create an index on the |