Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Reiner Dassing <dassing@wettzell.ifag.de> writes:
> > > The primary index must be the epoch.
> > > As there will be no deletion from this data I fear - due to the
> > > internal representation of B-trees - the performance will degrade very
> > > soon.
> >
> > Nonsense. btree should work just fine for that. Use a timestamp
> > column for the primary key, and away you go.
> >
> > (Actually, time alone doesn't seem like it'd be necessarily unique,
> > so maybe you don't want to call it a primary key. But certainly
> > you can make a non-unique index on that column.)
>
> I assume the user is concerned about non-balanced btrees.
That is correct!
As I tested an example database with about 7 million entries on PostgreSQL V
6.5.2
and the result of
select count(*) from table;
tooks about 3 minutes I have this concern.
May be version 7.0.3 will give a better result.
> Ours are
> auto-balancing.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
--
Reiner Dassing