From: | Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Damian C <jamianb(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Do non-sequential primary keys slow performance significantly?? |
Date: | 2006-09-29 15:10:23 |
Message-ID: | 20060929151023.78307.qmail@web31802.mail.mud.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-novice |
> The most difficult part of this question is justifying WHY we would
> want to use random primary keys! There is a very strong reason for
> doing so, although not quite compelling.
One problem with using random generated primary keys that I've
recently read about deal with insert failing do to primary key
duplication.
If the size of your dataset grows to become a significant percentage
of the size of the integer type used for your random primary key,
the probability of inserting a duplicated number dramatically
increases. I imagine that this problem could contribute to poor
preformance for large bulk inserts that have to add logic for
dealing with re-trying a insert if a duplicate number is created.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul B. Anderson | 2006-09-29 15:12:08 | Re: Stored procedure array limits |
Previous Message | Paul B. Anderson | 2006-09-29 15:00:13 | Re: Stored procedure array limits |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brandon Aiken | 2006-09-29 18:44:59 | Re: [NOVICE] Do non-sequential primary keys slow performance significantly?? |
Previous Message | Shane Ambler | 2006-09-29 13:36:57 | Re: Do non-sequential primary keys slow performance |