Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> For three separate indexes, an update or delete of a single row in the indexed table would surely require changing at
leastthree pages in the indexes. For some as-yet-ill-defined combined index type, perhaps the three entries in the
indexwould fall on the same index page often enough to reduce the I/O cost of the action?
Of course, we have that today from the solution of one index with the
extra columns "included". I think the OP has completely failed to make
any case why that's not a good enough approach.
regards, tom lane
