| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | DM <dm(dot)aeqa(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Composite Index question |
| Date: | 2010-10-21 02:28:34 |
| Message-ID: | 9830.1287628114@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
DM <dm(dot)aeqa(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I know there is no benfit of having duplicate indexes.
> Inorder for me to make change on production it requires lot of approvals and
> stuff.
> I wnat to know if there is any major performance drawback for having
> duplicate composite index,
Of course there is: it doubles the index-update overhead every time you
update the table, in return for no benefit whatsoever. Get rid of the
duplicate index. (Now, if the table is seldom updated, it might not be
urgent to do so. But you ought to plan on doing it.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Kupershmidt | 2010-10-21 02:32:15 | Re: Generate a dynamic sequence within a query |
| Previous Message | Tim Uckun | 2010-10-21 02:24:00 | Updates, deletes and inserts are very slow. What can I do make them bearable? |