From: Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org>
To: Matthew Sackman <matthew@lshift.net>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Massive performance issues
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 16:34:36 -0600
Message-ID: <20050901223436.GA44175@winnie.fuhr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050901174231.GE23970@pongo.lshift.net>
References: <20050901174231.GE23970@pongo.lshift.net>
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 06:42:31PM +0100, Matthew Sackman wrote:
>
> "address_pc_top_index" btree (postcode_top)
> "address_pc_top_middle_bottom_index" btree (postcode_top,
> postcode_middle, postcode_bottom)
> "address_pc_top_middle_index" btree (postcode_top, postcode_middle)
This doesn't address the query performance problem, but isn't only
one of these indexes necessary? The second one, on all three
columns, because searches involving only postcode_top or only
postcode_top and postcode_middle could use it, making the indexes
on only those columns superfluous. Or am I missing something?
--
Michael Fuhr
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: mike@fuhr.org, matthew@lshift.net
Subject: Re: Massive performance issues
In-Reply-To: <20050901223436.GA44175@winnie.fuhr.org>
* 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