On 7/22/07, Vincenzo Romano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sunday 22 July 2007 19:20:08 Tom Lane wrote:
> Vincenzo Romano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the original setup, the "UNIQUE" constraint had been dropped
> > *before* doing the tests. So the "slow" case is without the
> > UNIQUE constraint but with an index. The NOT NULL was instead
> > there.
>
> With what index, pray tell?
>
> regards, tom lane
Sorry for the incomplete sentence.
Read it as:
In the original setup, the "UNIQUE" constraint had been dropped
*before* doing the tests. So the "slow" case is without the
UNIQUE constraint but with an index on NOT NULL fields.
Control question: did you recreate non-unique index after dropping
the UNIQUE constraint?
Regards,
Dawid
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
