> -----Original Message-----
> From: Diogo Biazus [mailto:diogo@ikono.com.br]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 11:02 AM
> To: Dann Corbit
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Wich hardware suits best for large
> full-text indexed databases
>
>
> Dann Corbit wrote:
>
> >I see that only table documentos has a unique index. Is it
> really so
> >that none of the other tables has a key to uniquely identify
> a record?
> >Perhaps the others have a unique attribute but it was never declared
> >when forming the index?
> >
> I thougth that a primary key would create a unique index implictly.
Yes, I believe that is correct also. It is strange that it is not
reflected in the schema.
> >I do not remember which version of PostgreSQL you are using,
> but there
> >is now a CLUSTER command. Now, I am speaking with my experience in
> >other database systems, and so perhaps the PostgreSQL group
> may find it
> >necessary to correct me. I have only recently began working with
> >PostgreSQL versions beyond 7.1.3 which had no cluster command (or at
> >least I was not aware of one). In other database systems, a
> clustered
> >index is incredibly valuable. In fact, a unique, clustered index is
> >always a silver bullet to marvelous performance. Perhaps
> some of the
> >experts can give measurements as to the effectiveness of
> clustering in
> >PostgreSQL. Here is the link for the cluster documentation:
> >http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-cluster.html
> >
> >>From the description, clustering is expensive and your tables are
> >>large.
> >So it should be an infrequent operation.
> >
> >
> Sure, my pgsql is version 7.3.4 (I was obviosly mistaken when I wrote
> 7.4.3 in a previous email) I used to do clustering in some
> tables, but
> is a expensive operation as said...
Can you send me an unload of your schema? I will pull it into ERWin/Erx
and have a look at the model. It is hard for me to picture things
unless I can see them visually.
