Database Administrators Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for database professionals who wish to improve their database skills and learn from others in the community. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a table named PRODUCT that has 100,000 rows. I was wondering if either indexing, or a hash function on the primary key would result in better performance. I was also hoping someone could explain why either of these would be better.

share|improve this question
How many fields? How unique is the data? What candidate keys do you have? What's the access pattern - reads only, balanced read/write, many writes/updates? – JNK May 30 '12 at 15:28
What's your database? 100K records is not a lot in most cases. – Jon of All Trades May 30 '12 at 15:33

With 100k records it shouldn't matter. Even with 100M records it probably won't matter. I've had queries on tables with billions of rows using good old traditional indexes perform just fine.

It's all about how much memory you have and how fast the disks are.

Granted you'll probably get some more specific information if you tell us what database you are using and provide more specifics.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for your reply. – Tomi Jun 1 '12 at 6:24
If apart of considering the memory and disk, which method is better in performance and maintenance ? For example, if new rows need to be inserted... – Tomi Jun 1 '12 at 6:34
That will totally depend on the database vendor and how they have implemented these features. – mrdenny Jun 2 '12 at 10:08

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.