Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > If I remember correctly, you didn't like the index routines reading the
> > tuple information, or something like that, but there was a performance
> > benefit for duplicate keys, so I think we should re-investigate this.
>
> I don't see the actual patch either in the hackers or patches archives,
> nor on your to-apply pages, making it a bit difficult to re-investigate.
> Where was it posted anyway?
Found it:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=200312010450.hB14ovH16330%40candle.pha.pa.us&rnum=8
Personally, because frequently accessed duplicates appear more forward
in the duplicate index, I think the sorting is only valuable when
creating a new index.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
