| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Index creation takes for ever |
| Date: | 2003-09-07 15:57:36 |
| Message-ID: | 12266.1062950256@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I assume this completes this TODO:
> * Order duplicate index entries by tid for faster heap lookups
I don't know why that TODO entry exists, but I think the idea is
counterproductive. The existing btree code will tend to put newer
versions of a row earlier (because it puts a new entry in front of any
with duplicate keys), which usually reduces the time spent skipping dead
rows. Forcing tid ordering will cost us more in dead-row skipping than
it's likely to save elsewhere.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-07 16:16:23 | Re: [HACKERS] Index creation takes for ever |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-07 15:46:20 | Re: pg_id and pg_encoding |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-09-07 16:08:42 | Re: [PATCHES] MinGW patch |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-07 15:43:42 | Re: [HACKERS] Index creation takes for ever |