| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alexander Priem" <ap(at)cict(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | "Tomasz Myrta" <jasiek(at)klaster(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Indexing question |
| Date: | 2003-08-29 14:00:14 |
| Message-ID: | 15992.1062165614@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Alexander Priem" <ap(at)cict(dot)nl> writes:
> Does anyone know whether it is bad practise to have two indexes on the
> primary key of a table? (one 'primary key' index and one partial index)
It's a little unusual, but if you get enough performance boost from it
to justify the maintenance cost of the extra index, then I can't see
anything wrong with it.
The "if" is worth checking though. I missed the start of this thread,
but what percentage of your rows do you expect to have null deleteddate?
Unless it's a pretty small percentage, I'm unconvinced that the extra
indexes will be worth their cost.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-08-29 14:05:08 | Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load |
| Previous Message | Oliver Siegmar | 2003-08-29 13:54:46 | PL/pgSQL functions - text / varchar - havy performance issue?! |