PFC wrote: > So, here is something annoying with the current approach : Updating rows > in a table bloats ALL indices, not just those whose indexed values have > been actually updated. So if you have a table with many indexed fields and > you often update some obscure timestamp field, all the indices will bloat, > which will of course be corrected by VACUUM, but vacuum will have extra > work to do.
The MVCC approach probably doesn't leave you with many choices here. The index entries point directly to the rows in the table, and since an update creates a new row (it's the equivalent of doing an insert then a delete), all indexes have to be updated to reflect the location of the new row. Unless my understanding of how this works is completely off... -- Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend