| From: | Kai-Uwe Sattler <kus(at)tu-ilmenau(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "PGSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Gurjeet Singh" <gurjeet(dot)singh(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Index Advisor] |
| Date: | 2006-11-20 08:28:53 |
| Message-ID: | 22D149FC-21CA-47EF-873A-C8522004AA9B@tu-ilmenau.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Am 20.11.2006 um 06:35 schrieb Gurjeet Singh:
> But there is another bug: if there are recommendations like idx
> (a,b,c), idx(a,b) and idx(a) it would be a good idea to create just
> idx(a). I will add this to pg_advise as an optional feature.
>
> I'd say it's a new feature request and not a bug :) But I don't
> understand why would you want to not build idx(a,b,c) in such a
> situation? idx(a,b,c) can be useful in places where idx(a,b) or idx
> (a) is required, but the same can't be said about idx(a) or idx
> (a,b) being useful where idx(a,b,c) is required!
>
You are right - that's what I actually meant...
Kai
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2006-11-20 09:43:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition |
| Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2006-11-20 06:44:49 | Re: [Fwd: Index Advisor] |