From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Slow functional indexes?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 23:30:32 -0400
Message-ID: <20906.1161401432@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45387666.204@canonical.com>
References: <45387666.204@canonical.com>
Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com> writes:
> I would like to understand what causes some of my indexes to be slower to
> use than others with PostgreSQL 8.1.
I was about to opine that it was all about different levels of
correlation between the index order and physical table order ... but
your experiments with freshly clustered indexes seem to cast doubt
on that idea. Are you sure your function is really immutable? A buggy
function could possibly lead to a "clustered" index not being in
physical order.
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, stuart.bishop@canonical.com
Subject: Re: Slow functional indexes?
In-Reply-To: <20906.1161401432@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