| From: | Durgamahesh Manne <maheshpostgres9(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | sud <suds1434(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>, xof(at)thebuild(dot)com, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Question on indexes |
| Date: | 2024-10-11 13:37:30 |
| Message-ID: | CAJCZkoKAhQ2VC-eA4zWgxfW5nTAA2N4V5vrsWFXHPVvVg0WdfQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 6:18 PM Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> (please start a new thread in the future rather than replying to an
> existing one)
>
> You cannot query on b and use an index on (a,b) as you observed. However,
> you can have two indexes:
>
> index1(a)
> index2(b)
>
> Postgres will be able to combine those when needed in the case where your
> WHERE clause needs to filter by both columns. So then you no longer need
> the two-column index.
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
Hi greg
Mail sent you with a new thread. composite key is on partitioned table
Regards,
Durga Mahesh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Erik Wienhold | 2024-10-11 13:46:56 | Re: Questions about document "Concurrenry control" section |
| Previous Message | Durgamahesh Manne | 2024-10-11 13:31:50 | Fwd: Inefficient use of index scan on 2nd column of composite index during concurrent activity |