Keep in mind that it will take longer to build the index in the first place, and make your decision appropriately.
Regards,
Harrison
On Thursday, September 9, 2004, at 05:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The uniqueness constraint would only be enforced during an INSERT or an
UPDATE. If your table is read-only, declaring the index as UNIQUE will be
overkill. I can't tell you about any kind of performance hit during
reading but I try to follow the maxim "don't ask for it if you won't need
it". I would use just a straight index.
Shawn Green Database Administrator Unimin Corporation - Spruce Pine
Wesley Furgiuele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/09/2004 04:36:50 PM:
Hi:
I was wondering if there is any performance-related reason to use a unique index versus a standard index? Is the only benefit of a unique index that it will prevent duplicate values from being inserted into a table unless explicitly allowed?
I have a column, colA, that I know contains only unique values because I create the table using a 'GROUP BY colA' clause. Before I use the table for any more work, I want to index colA. This table will have no further rows added to it, so I don't need to worry about a potential duplicate value being inserted. I was just wondering if it was a performance gain/hit to use a unique index, or if the difference was negligible.
Thanks.
Wes
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]