From: | Lauri Pietarinen <lauri(dot)pietarinen(at)atbusiness(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL |
Date: | 2003-10-21 18:28:41 |
Message-ID: | bn3tve$qln$1@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bob Badour wrote:
>"Lauri Pietarinen" <lauri(dot)pietarinen(at)atbusiness(dot)com> wrote in message
>news:3F94BCBB(dot)7030001(at)atbusiness(dot)com(dot)(dot)(dot)
>
>
>>I could now denormalise OrderDetail so that it contains cust_id also
>>and cluster by cust_id
>>(might cause you trouble down the road, if you can change the customer
>>of an order), in which case, with 3 I/O's I would get
>>- 8 customer rows
>>- 16 order rows
>>- 24 order detail rows (which would all apply to one customer)
>>
>>
>
>Depending on block size, by clustering the three tables together, one might
>get all of those rows for a single read potentially improving on Wol's
>numbers by a factor of eight or more for this one query. Of course, doing so
>would increase the cost of a table scan on the customer table.
>
>
Which DBMS'es support clustering of mutiple tables except for Oracle?
Is this feature really used any more?
I thought it was more trouble than worth.
regards,
Lauri
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2003-10-21 18:38:15 | Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-21 18:25:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Mapping Oracle types to PostgreSQL types |