> That actually makes sense to me. Cluster the rows covered by that > index, let the rest fall where they may. I'm typically only accessing > the rows covered by that index, so I'd get the benefit of the cluster > command but wouldn't have to spend cycles doing the cluster for rows I > don't care about.
Sure, that's a feature request though. And thinking about it, I'm willing to bet that it's far harder to implement than it sounds. In the meantime, you could ad-hoc this by splitting the table into two partitions and clustering one of the two partitions. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
