Re: [GENERAL] Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:56:12 +0200

From: Dustin Sallings <dustin(at)spy(dot)net>
To: Jim Jennis <jhjennis(at)shentel(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:56:12 +0200
Date: 1999-06-27 03:01:30
Message-ID: Pine.SGI.3.95.990626200021.3570A-100000@bleu.west.spy.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Jim Jennis wrote:

# Not only legacy apps, but data warehousing. Frequently in a production
# environment you use two sets of tables -- production and data
# warehousing...One (production) with "bare bones" indicies to maximize
# transaction performance, and one (a replicate in the data warehouse)
# that you "index the living daylights out of" so that the non db saavy
# managers who want to do ungodly joints and sorts on tables for
# organizational reporting get decent performance.

Creating lots of indices is far different from creating a single
index on a lot of fields. Data warehousing is the former. The problem is
that you can't create a single index with a large number of fields.

--
SA, beyond.com My girlfriend asked me which one I like better.
pub 1024/3CAE01D5 1994/11/03 Dustin Sallings <dustin(at)spy(dot)net>
| Key fingerprint = 87 02 57 08 02 D0 DA D6 C8 0F 3E 65 51 98 D8 BE
L_______________________ I hope the answer won't upset her. ____________

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dustin Sallings 1999-06-27 03:02:12 Re: [GENERAL] Definitive list of new types in 6.5 needed
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-06-27 02:19:17 Re: [GENERAL] large object minimum storage