| From: | "Md(dot) Ezhar Ansari" <ezhar(dot)ansari(at)alumnux(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Inquiry Regarding PostgreSQL Index Size - Seeking Community Insights |
| Date: | 2023-12-22 14:20:22 |
| Message-ID: | BM1PR01MB371413CB7A7DC039C8892ECB8F94A@BM1PR01MB3714.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Hi Folks,
I recently posted a question on the Database Administrators Stack Exchange platform<https://dba.stackexchange.com/> that I believe aligns with the expertise of your community. The question revolves around the size difference between a composite index and a default index on the 'ID' column. The link to the question is provided below:
Why the size of composite index is less than the default index (index on ID)?<https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/334284/why-the-size-of-composite-index-is-less-than-the-default-index-index-on-id-of>
I am eager to hear any thoughts or explanations you might have regarding this observed size difference. Have you encountered similar scenarios, and do you have any recommendations or explanations for this phenomenon?
Ezhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2023-12-22 19:49:34 | Best way to stop Streaming Replication? |
| Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2023-12-22 12:25:22 | Re: Oracle to Postgres migration |