From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Praveen Raja <praveen.raja@netlight.se>
Cc: 'Jacques Caron' <jc@directinfos.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Insert performance vs Table size
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 10:25:59 -0400
Message-ID: <14991.1119968759@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <002401c57bc6$ca56e2c0$4c0ca8c0@sto.netlight.se>
References: <002401c57bc6$ca56e2c0$4c0ca8c0@sto.netlight.se>
"Praveen Raja" <praveen.raja@netlight.se> writes:
> I know that having indexes on the table adds an overhead but again does
> this overhead increase (for an INSERT operation) with the number of rows
> the table contains?
Typical index implementations (such as b-tree) have roughly O(log N)
cost to insert or lookup a key in an N-entry index. So yes, it grows,
though slowly.
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, praveen.raja@netlight.se, jc@directinfos.com
Subject: Re: Insert performance vs Table size
In-Reply-To: <14991.1119968759@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