(Sorry, did not include the list in the reply)
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> Yes. That's how it works.
Is that how it works for an index as well? I just found out that I have
an index that is 35GB, and the table is 85GB. ( I will look into the
index, it works fine, but an index that is almost one third of the size
of the table, seems a little bit strange. )
So if it works the same way and the index uses a B-tree, I assume it
only loads the pages that contains the subpart of the index that are
relevant, is this correct?
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2009-01-22 15:34:29|
|Subject: Re: caching indexes and pages?|
|Previous:||From: Thomas Finneid||Date: 2009-01-22 12:11:23|
|Subject: Re: caching written values?|