From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Clarence Gardner <clarence@silcom.com>
Cc: Oleg Lebedev <oleg.lebedev@waterford.org>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: slow query
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:07:15 -0500
Message-ID: <10854.1046189235@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1046186882.1015.377.camel@camel>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302240925360.25665-100000@liberty.sba2.netlojix.net>
<1046111434.1014.165.camel@camel>
<200302241045.20856.josh@agliodbs.com>
<5421.1046119835@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1046186882.1015.377.camel@camel>
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> Would it be safe to say that tables with high update rates where the
> updates do not change the indexed value would not suffer from index
> bloat?
I would expect not. If you vacuum often enough to keep the main table
size under control, the index should stay under control too.
> For example updates to non-index columns or updates that
> overwrite, but don't change the value of indexed columns; do these even
> need to touch the index?
Yes, they do. Think MVCC.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, xzilla@users.sourceforge.net, josh@agliodbs.com, clarence@silcom.com, oleg.lebedev@waterford.org
Subject: Re: slow query
In-Reply-To: <10854.1046189235@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox