| From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'devik(at)cdi(dot)cz'" <devik(at)cdi(dot)cz>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan |
| Date: | 2000-09-26 19:14:54 |
| Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A23018D0F@SECTORBASE1 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Indice's TIDs are transient.
> > Isn't it useless to store indice's TIDs ?
>
> but yes Hiroshi is right. Index TID is transient. I first looked
> into pg sources two weeks ago so I have still holes in my knowledge.
> So that only solution is to traverse it ..
It was discussed several times for btree - add heap tid to index key and
you'll
scan index for particulare tuple much faster.
Not sure what could be done for hash indices... order hash items with the
same hash key?
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2000-09-26 19:21:53 | RE: Damn, pg_proc index corrupted, can't find anythign on REINDEX ... |
| Previous Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2000-09-26 19:09:29 | RE: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan |