| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Clustering system catalog indexes |
| Date: | 2004-05-20 02:58:32 |
| Message-ID: | 200405200258.i4K2wWD20880@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 09:43:22PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > Is it worth us marking any system catalog indexes as clusterable by
> > > default for performance?
> >
> > Not sure. Most of the system stuff is loaded in a pretty good order, and
> > cluster is only good if you are going after seveal rows of identical
> > value or similar value in the same table, and I can't think of a case
> > where this would help. Can others? It is a good question.
>
> pg_attribute maybe?
Ah, good point. Because of vacuum reuse, it could grab rows in
different locations when creating a table. Good point.
Added to TODO:
o Add default clustering to system tables
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-05-20 02:58:51 | Re: Clustering system catalog indexes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-05-20 02:32:50 | Re: Join works in 7.3.6, fails in 7.4.2 |