Greg Stark wrote:
clustering...
That will only help if you're often retrieving moderately large result sets by
one particular index. If you normally only retrieve one record at a time or
from lots of different indexes then it probably won't really make much
difference.
It'll also help for colu
Junaili Lie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quick questions:
> For big tables with frequent insert, no update, and frequent read
> (using indexes), will clustering help?
> what should be done on such table other than regular analyze?
> comments are appreciated.
If you never have any deletes or upda
Quick questions:
For big tables with frequent insert, no update, and frequent read
(using indexes), will clustering help?
what should be done on such table other than regular analyze?
comments are appreciated.
On 8/16/05, Kevin Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg Stark wrote:
>
> >All that
Greg Stark wrote:
All that said clustering is indeed often quite effective. Especially if it
makes an index scan efficient enough to win over sequential scans you can see
some huge effects. It's most useful for tables that aren't undergoing lots of
updates and don't need to be reclustered often.
Kevin Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is just an FYI for other people out there with large tables: table
> clustering sped up my queries from 10-100 times, which I am very happy about.
> I'm posting this in case it's ever useful to anybody. If someone reading this
> feels that I did so
