yet another stupid question (index coverage) - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Alex Pilosov
Subject yet another stupid question (index coverage)
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSO.4.10.10105171714160.7355-100000@spider.pilosoft.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: yet another stupid question (index coverage)
List pgsql-general
Postgresql doesn't support index coverage, does it?

Some stuff that really flied on [cough] other database seems very slow.
Explain shows it is using index scan, however, it looks like database is
fetching blocks from all over the disk, when all information necessary is
already in index.

For those unfamiliar with index coverage, it is used to avoid access to
the main table when all necessary information can be found in index
itself. (Example: select count(*) where condition, assume table has
1M rows, only 10k of them will be selected. Assume that page in main table
covers 50 records and page in index covers 500 records. Total pages
accessed without index coverage: ~10k, with coverage: ~20).

Any chance of this feature getting on the wish list? :)

I thought about coding that feature myself, but it seems to be quite
involved: Apparently TupleTableSlot as it is _must_ have all information
from the row...

-alex


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Martín Marqués
Date:
Subject: rotate sql.log
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: yet another stupid question (index coverage)