From: | Francisco Reyes <lists(at)natserv(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pgsql Novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Indeces vs small tables |
Date: | 2001-08-05 19:51:04 |
Message-ID: | 20010805153025.S35112-100000@zoraida.natserv.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
For small tables, less than 100 rows, does it pay off to have an index?
I have 3 tables:
system table
system serial
name varchar(15)
heartbeat table
system integer references system table
operation integer references operation table
time timestamp
operations table
operation serial
name varchar(15)
I will be loading some log data to the heartbeat table, but the program
that produce the data will be creating something along the lines:
system1, update
system2, delete
I would use the "name" field on the system table to find the system ID and
then insert that on the heartbeat table. Likewise I would use the name
field on the operations table to find the operation ID and insert that on
the heartbeat table.
For every log entry 1 search will be performed on system and another on
operations. The question is whether an index on those two fields would
help.
Doing some explain select tests always returned a "sequential scan"
regardless of whether I had an index or not. So is it unnecessary to
create indeces for such small tables?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Francisco Reyes | 2001-08-05 20:30:10 | select vs varchar |
Previous Message | Danny Aldham | 2001-08-04 00:25:12 | Re: Knowing new item in table... |