From: | Mike Christensen <mike(at)kitchenpc(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com |
Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Schnabel, Robert D(dot)" <schnabelr(at)missouri(dot)edu>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: When does CLUSTER occur? |
Date: | 2012-11-29 17:43:27 |
Message-ID: | CABs1bs38fjBaqyDo=1vGTys9MY22h+211Cn89n0TMKeCNuJ3Vw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com>wrote:
> On 11/29/2012 11:28 AM, Mike Christensen wrote:
>
> It's always kinda annoyed me that the CLUSTER command in Postgres
>> doesn't work like it does on Microsoft SQL.
>>
>
> It's a natural side-effect of MVCC, unfortunately. Data goes wherever it
> goes according to the free space map, or at the end if there are no free
> blocks in the table.
>
> I guess that's one thing rollback segments are good for. In-place
> modifications of data so order can be maintained.
>
>
Yea, in MS SQL, inserts are more expensive with a clustered index because
it has to go move junk around on the heap table..
I've just kinda gotten used to the PG approach, as you can always just
re-cluster if you do some huge insert of a bunch of data. I guess what I'd
be asking for is a feature that would automatically re-cluster whenever new
data was committed, however you could just do that with a trigger I
suppose..
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-11-29 18:20:11 | Re: When does CLUSTER occur? |
Previous Message | Schnabel, Robert D. | 2012-11-29 17:42:46 | Re: When does CLUSTER occur? |