Re: Index speeds up one row table (why)?

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: Dave E Martin XXIII <postgresql-to(dot)dave(at)dave(dot)to>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index speeds up one row table (why)?
Date: 2003-06-01 05:33:39
Message-ID: 20030601053339.GB16259@wolff.to
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-performance

On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 16:56:56 -0600,
Dave E Martin XXIII <postgresql-to(dot)dave(at)dave(dot)to> wrote:
>
> (ok, experimented a bit more just now)
> Hm, it appears that degredation occurs with the index as well, I guess
> at the time I created the index, it just initially did better because it
> got to skip all the already dead rows at creation time: but this is
> disturbing, I do a vacuum, and the access times are better, but still
> horrible:

You really don't want to use an index, so this probably doesn't matter
for the current application. The problem is that when data is inserted
into an index that just increases (or decreases) in value space from
deleted entries doesn't get reused. I believe this is fixed in 7.4.
This case would apply to indexes based on counters, dates or times
where new values are added and old values get deleted.

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-06-01 05:36:50 Re: Index speeds up one row table (why)?
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-06-01 05:23:51 Re: Bug or not...

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-06-01 05:43:37 Re: are views typically any faster/slower than equivilent joins?
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2003-06-01 04:05:56 Re: are views typically any faster/slower than equivilent joins?