On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> That had occurred to me, but I was hesitant to only use temp indexes. It
> still doesn't really offer a good solution when both sides of the join
> are relatively large (because of random I/O). Also the build speed of
> the index would be more important than it is now.
The thing I like most about temp indexes is that they needn't be temporary.
I'd like to see something along the lines of demand-created optional
indexes, that we reclaim space/maintenance overhead on according to
some cache management scheme. More space you have, the more of the
important ones hang around. The rough same idea applies to
materialised views.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
