| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "J(dot) Andrew Rogers" <jrogers(at)neopolitan(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, mischa(dot)sandberg(at)telus(dot)net |
| Subject: | Re: Equivalent praxis to CLUSTERED INDEX? |
| Date: | 2004-08-31 21:50:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20040831215013.GJ78395@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 12:04:48PM -0700, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> The major caveat to having tables of this type is that you can only have
> a primary key index. No other indexes are possible because the "heap"
> constantly undergoes local reorganizations if you have a lot of write
> traffic, the same kind of reorganization you would normally expect in a
> BTree index.
This isn't true, at least in 9i. You can create whatever indexes you
want on an index-organized table. I believe that the index stores the PK
value instead of the ROWID.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-08-31 22:03:05 | Re: Context Switching issue: Spinlock doesn't fix. |
| Previous Message | jelle | 2004-08-31 21:20:41 | Re: Context Switching issue: Spinlock doesn't fix. |