Re: Select performance vs. mssql

From: PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: 2005-05-25 00:14:01
Message-ID: op.sra1lngnth1vuj@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


> Pretty much. There has been discussion about allowing index-only access
> to
> "frozen" tables, i.e. archive partitions. But it all sort of hinges on
> someone implementing it and testing ....

Would be interesting as a parameter to set at index creation (ie. if you
know this table will have a lot of reads and few writes)... like create an
index on columns X,Y keeping data on columns X,Y and Z...
But in this case do you still need the table ?
Or even create a table type where the table and the index are one, like
an auto-clustered table...
I don't know if it would be used that often, though ;)

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Stone 2005-05-25 00:20:39 Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-05-24 23:35:14 Re: Select performance vs. mssql