Re: [GENERAL] advanced index (descending and table-presorted descending)

2006-11-26 Thread Jim Nasby
On Nov 22, 2006, at 1:51 PM, John D. Burger wrote: However, Cluster might work for you, but you need to re-cluster after every updates or inserts, so it will probably be fine for static data. This reminds me of a (somewhat off-topic) question I have had: I have a static database, and most of

Re: [GENERAL] advanced index (descending and table-presorted descending)

2006-11-22 Thread John D. Burger
However, Cluster might work for you, but you need to re-cluster after every updates or inserts, so it will probably be fine for static data. This reminds me of a (somewhat off-topic) question I have had: I have a static database, and most of the tables are 100% correlated with one column or a

Re: [GENERAL] advanced index (descending and table-presorted descending)

2006-11-22 Thread Peter Childs
On 21/11/06, Vic Cekvenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can pgSQL 8.x do descending indexes like mySQL 5.1? (so 1st column is descending and rest are asscending?) Can pgSQL 8.x do "physically" sorted table (like a forced index order) so we don't need order by? tia, .V No and I don't really