| From: | Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ibrahim Harrani <ibrahim(dot)harrani(at)gmail(dot)com>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: cluster index on a table |
| Date: | 2009-07-16 00:33:30 |
| Message-ID: | C683C36A.A2F8%scott@richrelevance.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
If you have a lot of insert/update/delete activity on a table fillfactor can help.
I don't believe that postgres will try and maintain the table in the cluster order however.
On 7/15/09 8:04 AM, "Ibrahim Harrani" <ibrahim(dot)harrani(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
Hi,
thanks for your suggestion.
Is there any benefit of setting fillfactor to 70 or 80 on this table?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Scott Marlowe<scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As another poster pointed out, you cluster on ONE index and one index
> only. However, you can cluster on a multi-column index.
>
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2009-07-16 00:40:02 | Re: Poor overall performance unless regular VACUUM FULL |
| Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2009-07-16 00:30:58 | Re: Poor overall performance unless regular VACUUM FULL |