On 2016-12-09 21:45:35 -0500, Melvin Davidson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Samuel Williams <space.ship.traveller@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >I also read that when you change a column which is not index, all the
> >indexes for that row need to be updated anyway. Is that correct?
>
> That is not correct. Indexes are changed under the following conditions:
> A. An insert is done to the table which involves an index.
> B. A delete is done to the table which involves an index.
> C. An update is done that involves columns included in an index.
> D. An index is REINDEXed
>
> Indexes point to the tid of the row for which the column(s) in the index
> are involved. So if columns updated are not involved in the index,
> there is no need to change the index.
I don't think this is generally correct. The TID is a (block,item)
tuple. It the updated version of the row doesn't fit into the same block
it has to be stored in a different block, so the TID will change (AIUI
there is a bit of trickery to avoid changing the TID if the new version
is stored in the same block). This means that all the index entries for
this row (not just for the changed field) will have to be updated. You
can set fillfactor to a smaller value to make this less likely.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | A coding theorist is someone who doesn't
|_|_) | | think Alice is crazy.
| | | hjp@xxxxxx | -- John Gordon
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | http://downlode.org/Etext/alicebob.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
