Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL index usage discussion.

From: "Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro" <lamigo(at)atc(dot)unican(dot)es>
To: "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: "mlw" <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>,"PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL index usage discussion.
Date: 2002-04-25 06:56:44
Message-ID: 007701c1ec26$5c64b220$ (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> I was told that DB2 has per-table (or rather per-tablespace) knowledge
> of disk speeds, so keeping separate random and seqsqan costs for each
> table and index could be a good way here (to force use of a particular
> index make its use cheap)

I was wondering something even easier, keeping 1 cost per index, 1 cost per
seqscan, but being allowed to scale cost for each index on each
query(recommended, null or unrecommended)

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Curt SampsonDate: 2002-04-25 07:28:51
Subject: Re: Sequential Scan Read-Ahead
Previous:From: Luis Alberto Amigo NavarroDate: 2002-04-25 06:42:03
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL index usage discussion.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group