On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Grant Johnson wrote:
> My experience has been that the performance advantage for numeric keys is
> primarily an Oracle thing. However, Oracle is popular enough for people to
> assume that it applies to databases in general.
The advantage in PG also exists, only t
For SQL Server, having a clustered index on a numeric incrementing key
is much better than having a semi-random uuid primary key used as the
clustered index itself.
Florent
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Grant Johnson wrote:
> My experience has been that the performance advantage for numeric k
My experience has been that the performance advantage for numeric keys is
primarily an Oracle thing. However, Oracle is popular enough for people to
assume that it applies to databases in general.
Julien Cigar wrote:
>The biggest difference in performance between text and integer keys is
>us
The biggest difference in performance between text and integer keys is
usually down to whether you're inserting in order or not. Inserting in
order is tons faster regardless of the type, since it keeps the index
unfragmented and doesn't cause page splits.
On 02/04/2013 22:52, Anne Rosset wrote
2013/2/4 Anne Rosset :
> I have read a lot of different information about the benefits of using
> numerical primary key vs alphanumerical primary key(small size). And what I
> am gathering is that for performance there is no more great advantage.
>
> It seems like now RDBMS in general, postgres in
Hi,
I have read a lot of different information about the benefits of using
numerical primary key vs alphanumerical primary key(small size). And what I am
gathering is that for performance there is no more great advantage.
It seems like now RDBMS in general, postgres in particular handles pretty w
