From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | salman <salmanb(at)quietcaresystems(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Question about CLUSTER |
Date: | 2008-02-12 02:42:19 |
Message-ID: | 20080212024219.GA42737@winnie.fuhr.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-novice pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 03:33:37PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2008 2:03 PM, salman <salmanb(at)quietcaresystems(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm planning to cluster a few large tables in our database but I'm
> > unable to find any recommendations/documentation on best practices --
> > Mainly, whether it's better to use an index which has a higher idx_scan
> > value, a higher idx_tup_read value, or the higest idx_tup_fetch value.
> >
> > I'm assuming that idx_tup_read would probably be the best choice, but
> > want to get other opinions before proceeding.
>
> If you've got two indexes that are both being hit a lot, it might be
> worth looking into their correlation, and if they get used a lot
> together, look at creating an index on both.
>
> But I'd guess that idx_tup_read would be a good bet.
You might also consider the ratio idx_tup_read::float8 / idx_scan
to see which indexes access a lot of rows per scan.
--
Michael Fuhr
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Childs | 2008-02-12 07:56:16 | Re: 8.3.0 upgrade, confused by documentation |
Previous Message | Tena Sakai | 2008-02-11 22:25:10 | Re: 8.3.0 upgrade, confused by documentation |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Swierczek | 2008-02-12 14:30:27 | Re: Question regarding GROUP BY |
Previous Message | Andreas | 2008-02-12 01:59:08 | Re: Question regarding GROUP BY |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Linux Guru | 2008-02-12 08:32:29 | Re: Update with Subquery Performance |
Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2008-02-12 01:00:13 | Re: Questions about enabling SSL |