| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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? |