| From: | Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | PostgreSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Linking tables and indexes | 
| Date: | 2007-01-16 02:46:56 | 
| Message-ID: | 87ac0jit7j.fsf@gmail.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> If you're in 8.1 or better, I'd suggest defining only two indexes, one
I'm on 8.1. Waiting for SuSE to update to 8.2... ;-)
> on (ci_id) and other on (document_client_id), and let the system deal
> with mixing them using the bitmap scan technique when appropriate.
I thought about that but then I'd loose the UNIQUE constraint on this set.
I've also thought about creating a third index to specify the UNIQUE
constraint but ...
> OTOH since the columns are probably not separately unique, you'll need
> the primary key anyway, in which case leave the PK alone and create
> another index on (document_client_id).
... I haven't thought on this and it is much better :-)  I played with some
possibilities and I forgot mixing a composed index with a simple one... :-) 
This is what I went with. Thanks!
-- 
Jorge Godoy      <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jorge Godoy | 2007-01-16 02:48:49 | Re: Improve Postgres Query Speed | 
| Previous Message | carter ck | 2007-01-16 02:26:15 | Re: Improve Postgres Query Speed |