Re: Win2K Questions

From: Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan(at)nsd(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Win2K Questions
Date: 2002-11-11 19:50:05
Message-ID: 3DD009ED.DA657733@nsd.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan(at)nsd(dot)ca> writes:
> > What would be involved in adding version and visibility to the index?
>
> * Index bloat. An index entry is currently 8 bytes plus the index key,
> eg 12 bytes for an int4 index. Version info would add 12 bytes.
> Doubling the size of indexes would double the time for index scans.

That is true for for small keys, but for varchar(20) the impact is less.

>
> * Update costs. Instead of one place to update when a row is updated,
> now all the associated index entries would have to be updated too.

The index has to be updated anyhow to reflect the new record. Doesn't
it?

>
> regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-11-11 22:27:42 Re: question about efficiency
Previous Message Vassil Kriakov 2002-11-11 19:44:09 Re: C++: get value for integral types?