From: | Brian Ghidinelli <brian(at)pukkasoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | SF Postgres <sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clustered index when not always in the WHERE clause |
Date: | 2010-10-29 21:05:36 |
Message-ID: | 4CCB3720.9030402@pukkasoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | sfpug |
On 10/29/2010 1:36 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Is the same event_id value shared by more than on club_id? If so, then
> clustering won't benefit you at all for event_id queries.
Jeff and Josh, thanks for the replies. Sorry I didn't clarify this in
the original post but event_ids are unique to club_id.
Jeff Davis wrote:
> - an event is only associated with one club (event_id determines
> club_id)
> - the combination of event and type is unique, but event is not
> unique by itself (is this true?)
event_id does not need type to be unique actually; in this particular
table 'where event_id = x' would be enough to return the right rows for
our purposes.
Sounds like the clustered index on (club_id, event_id) will get the job
done? Thanks!
Brian
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Broersma | 2010-10-29 23:03:59 | Call For Talks: PGDay LA @ SCALE 9X |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-10-29 20:36:45 | Re: Clustered index when not always in the WHERE clause |