Re: automated index suggestor -- request for comment
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: automated index suggestor -- request for comment |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1039798832.19813.28.camel@huli обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | automated index suggestor -- request for comment (johnnnnnn <john@phaedrusdeinus.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: automated index suggestor -- request for comment
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
I cc'b back to list, hope this is ok? On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 14:56, george young wrote: > On 13 Dec 2002 12:05:36 +0000 > Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 03:22, johnnnnnn wrote: > > > > In worst case you could generate the entries in pg_class table without > > building the actual index and then drop or rollback when the explain is > > ready. > > > --> Of course you could just determine all possibly useful indexes and <-- > --> generate then anyhow an then drop them if they were not used ;) <-- > > Why not! At least for selects, this seems like the ideal. For insert > and update, you have to deal with updating the superfluous indexes -- > does the planner include index updating in its work estimates? Probably not - the work should be almost the same (modulo cached status of index pages) for any plan. At least I think we don't optimize the plan for different index access patterns for updating indexes. > > For queries > that use functions in the where clause, you'd have to parse enough to know > to include indexes on the functions (I know-- the last time I said "all I > have to do is parse ..." I was really sorry later...). -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: