Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Atri Sharma
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture
Date
Msg-id CAOeZVicCSmiAoLrSYAcLvKNtzuEeKMFDOotJP-tykDS6K+hs3w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture  ("Ben Zeev, Lior" <lior.ben-zeev@hp.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
  >We may still be able to do better than what we're doing
> today, but I'm still suspicious that you're going to run into other
> issues with having 500 indexes on a table anyway.

+1. I am suspicious that the large number of indexes is the problem
here,even if the problem is not with book keeping associated with
those indexes.

Regards,

Atri


--
Regards,

Atri
l'apprenant



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Unsigned integer types
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: repeated warnings with 9.3 Beta 1 on windows