Re: since when has pg_stat_user_indexes.idx_scan been counting? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: since when has pg_stat_user_indexes.idx_scan been counting?
Date
Msg-id 8490.1305231378@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: since when has pg_stat_user_indexes.idx_scan been counting?  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> You're saying to watch out for (3); I think that's not usually the case,
> but that's a fair thing to warn about.  Even in that case, though, it
> may still be worth dropping the index.  Year-end processes are not
> usually very sensitive to whether they take a little or a long time to
> execute.  But you will be paying to maintain the index every day while
> it is there.

Yeah.  Another idea worth considering is to have the year-end processing
build the index it wants, use it, drop it.  It seems unlikely that it's
worth maintaining an index year-round for such infrequent usage.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: since when has pg_stat_user_indexes.idx_scan been counting?
Next
From: Lucas Madar
Date:
Subject: Re: Poor performance when joining against inherited tables