| From: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | codevally <codevally(dot)mail(dot)list(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL index issue |
| Date: | 2012-07-12 23:57:55 |
| Message-ID: | 4FFF6483.9080300@ringerc.id.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 07/13/2012 06:06 AM, codevally wrote:
> Hi Laurenz
>
> Many thanks for your reply.
>
> Could you please bit more explain about the following sentence you wrote:
>
> There are no performance problems except the ones that always come with an
> index: INSERTs, UPDATEs and DELETEs will be slower and do more disk I/O and
> locking.
Every index you add slows down modifications to the table a little bit,
because it has to be kept up to date. It also uses more disk space and
takes time for VACCUM.
--
Craig Ringer
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Toby Corkindale | 2012-07-13 01:46:54 | Re: Bug? Prepared queries continue to use search_path from their preparation time |
| Previous Message | codevally | 2012-07-12 22:06:23 | Re: PostgreSQL index issue |