Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Steinar H. Gunderson
Тема Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow
Дата
Msg-id 20060328162908.GB26539@uio.no
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow  ("Dave Dutcher" <dave@tridecap.com>)
Ответы Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow  ("Dave Dutcher" <dave@tridecap.com>)
Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 10:18:25AM -0600, Dave Dutcher wrote:
>>     "parameters_idx" btree (run, opset_num, step_num, opset,
> opset_ver,
>> step, step_ver, name, split, wafers)
>>     "parameters_opset_idx" btree (opset, step, name)
>>     "parameters_step_idx" btree (step, name)
> Have you tried creating some different indexes on parameters?  I don't
> know if it should matter or not, but I would try some indexes like:
>
> (run, opset_num) //Without all the other columns
> (opset_num, run) //Backwards
> (opset_num)

An index on (A,B,C) can be used for a query on (A,B) or (A), so it doesn't
really matter. It isn't usable for a query on (B), (C) or (B,C), though. (The
index rows will get bigger, of course, so you'll need more I/O if you want to
scan large parts of it, but I guess that's beside the point.)

/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Markus Schaber
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Massive Inserts Strategies
Следующее
От: "Dave Dutcher"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: simple join uses indexes, very slow