Search Results

The index is a sorted structure - if you need only a sufficiently small portion of the data in the table, it could be fetched from the index more efficiently. … This needs a few prerequisites, though: PostgreSQL version 9.2 or newer, as index-only scans appeared in this version the index supports the query (the order of the columns of the index decides this) …

From the documentation: index_type Some storage engines permit you to specify an index type when creating an index. … Where multiple index types are listed, the first one is the default when no index type specifier is given. …

Index Cond: (munkalap_id = ml.munkalap_id) Filter: ((NOT lezarva) AND (NOT torolve)) -> Index Scan using pk_munkalap_statusz on munkalap_statusz ms (cost=0.00..0.27 rows=1 … =4) (actual time=0.008..0.113 rows=1027 loops=1) Total runtime: 18725.001 ms The index definition is: CREATE INDEX idx_munkalap_lepes_aktualis ON hibabejelentes.munkalap_lepes USING btree (aktualis …

So the index scan and the whole query run quite fast as one would expect. …

Of course, you can create an index which would contain all columns from the rows. … The difference between the 'raw' table and this index will only show if the query picks only a part of all rows, based on the first column(s) of the index. …

Provided you have an index on user_id (or a compound index with user_id as the first column) and a user does not have to many rows, you don't have to index final_point and total_rank. …

No, the query performance will not be affected, or not very much. Indexes are updated on DML statements (and TRUNCATE) while they may or may not be used when executing a query. The decision whether …

Furthermore, an index like CREATE INDEX idx_emissions_totales_residentiel ON emissions_totales (schema_source, numreg, annee_ref, type_source_n1, unites) WHERE schema_source = 'residentiel'; will also … As edze suggested, going to PostgreSQL 9.2 and including 'emi' in the index (as the last column) could also help. …

Once it has all the data, it is much easier to sort them directly than to go to an index and match the rows and return them in order. … If you were on PostgreSQL 9.2 (or above) and you had an index on (pid, did) then the optimizer might have chosen an index scan instead. …

I would try making two composite partial indexes like CREATE INDEX idx1 ON tw_schedules (scenario_id, type_well_id) WHERE type_well_id IS NOT NULL; CREATE INDEX idx2 ON tw_schedules (scenario_id, tw_import_id …

I would expect that doing a SET enable_indexscan TO off; would help you finding the user by username, because it would do a sequential scan instead of an index scan, so not trying to use the unusable … index. …

While a GIN index can speed up searching inside an array quite significantly, you have to be aware that relational database engines are designed to do joins very efficiently. …

There are factors which point towards not using an index. … If you create the following index: CREATE INDEX ON crm_customer ((lower(name::text) text_pattern_ops, rating, address_id); -- thanks, Erwin there are chances it would be used. …

So let's see the index definition: CREATE INDEX reservation_r_article_id_idx1 ON reservation USING btree (r_article_id) WHERE (r_status <> ALL (ARRAY['FULFILLED', 'CLOSED', 'CANCELED'])); Sizes … The number of reservations that are not yet closed is about 170,000 (the exact number is reported in the index scan node above). …

This index could look like CREATE INDEX factura_venta_orden ON factura_venta USING btree (fcv_fecha_comprobante, fcv_numero_comprobante, fcv_id); But the biggest problem is that this still will be relatively … slow as 1 million rows of this index eat up 100 MB. …