From: | CG <cgg007(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>, PostgreSQL SQL <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clustering problem |
Date: | 2005-07-11 18:02:42 |
Message-ID: | 20050711180242.88540.qmail@web32509.mail.mud.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Why would you then drop the index? Performance and storage issues? I imagine
that I would cluster the table at regular intervals to maintain the ordering,
so I'd need to to keep the index around, yes?
--- PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> > Is it even possible to cluster a table based on the clustering scheme
> > (which is
> > not the link_id ...) from the master table?
> >
> > Can you gurus think of a better strategy? :) (Please??) :)
>
> You can create a functional index on a function which returns the desired
> order by looking in the main table, cluster it, then drop the index...
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
>
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions no fees. Bid on great items.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | TJ O'Donnell | 2005-07-12 03:16:17 | dynamically loaded functions |
Previous Message | Mauricio Fernandez | 2005-07-11 15:32:36 | PostgreSQL - ERROR: Cannot cast type character varying to integer |