On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:25 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Was this a low cardinality index in the way I describe? If it was,
> then we can hope (and maybe even verify) that the Postgres 12 work
> noticeably ameliorates the problem.
What I really meant was an index where hundreds or even thousands of
rows for each distinct timestamp value are expected. Not an index
where almost every row has a distinct timestamp value. Both timestamp
index patterns are common, obviously.
--
Peter Geoghegan