| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | KÖPFERL Robert <robert(dot)koepferl(at)sonorys(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "'dpandey(at)secf(dot)com'" <dpandey(at)secf(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, 'PostgreSQL' <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SQL] index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 27 |
| Date: | 2005-06-02 12:40:53 |
| Message-ID: | 429EFE55.3050601@archonet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-sql |
KÖPFERL Robert wrote:
> To me it seems that the definer of this table missed the concept index ...
> or the concept database
> One usually looks up data using a key, but if the whole row is the key, what
> data shall be looked up.
> So short story long: Remove data from your index. The data column seems
> like the data to be looked up using the key
> (scan_id, host_ip, port_num, plugin_id, severity) or even less.
> Postgres is able to take several indices over distinct columns into account.
> Thus reducing the possible candidates to a hand full.
> So several indices are also an option
Actually, Dinesh didn't mention he was using this for the speed of
lookup. He'd defined the columns as being the PRIMARY KEY, presumably
because he feels they are/should be unique. Given that they are rows
from a logfile, I'm not convinced this is the case.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Terry Lee Tucker | 2005-06-02 12:50:45 | Re: Determining when a row was inserted |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-06-02 12:35:20 | Re: index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 2713 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Bertheau | 2005-06-02 15:25:16 | getting details about integrity constraint violation |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-06-02 12:35:20 | Re: index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 2713 |