Re: Performance Issues

From: Dhanaraj M <Dhanaraj(dot)M(at)Sun(dot)COM>
To: Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance Issues
Date: 2006-05-24 03:56:51
Message-ID: 4473D983.6080701@sun.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thank you for your help. I found that an implicit index is created for
the primary key in the current version. However, it is not done in 7.x
version.

Mark Woodward wrote:

>>Dhanaraj M wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have the following doubts.
>>>
>>>1. Does postgres create an index on every primary key? Usually, queries
>>>are performed against a table on the primary key, so, an index on it
>>>will be very useful.
>>>
>>>
>>Yes, a unique index is used to enforce the primary-key.
>>
>>
>
>Well, here is an interesting question that I have suddenly become very
>curious of, if you have a primary key, obviously a unique index, is it, in
>fact, use this index regardless of analyzing the table?
>
>
>
>
>>>2. If 'm executing a complex query and it takes 10 seconds to return the
>>>results -- it takes 10 seconds to execute the next time also. I'm
>>>wondering if there's any kind of caching that can be enabled -- so, the
>>>next time it takes <10 seconds to return the results.
>>>
>>>
>>Not of query results. Obviously data itself might be cached. You might
>>want to look at memcached for this sort of thing.
>>
>>
>
>
>I am looking at this string of posts and it occurs to me that he should
>run analyze. Maybe I'm jumping at the wrong point.
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2006-05-24 04:17:17 Re: Performance Issues
Previous Message John Jawed 2006-05-24 03:15:19 Re: Improving ALTER TYPE support