On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 01:39:34PM +0100, Alberto Sim?es scratched on the wall: > Hi. > > I have a simple table w1,w2,w3,w3, occs and I need indexes for columns w1 to > w4. > Creating them I got: > > $ time sqlite3 _.db 'CREATE INDEX wi1 ON tet (w1)' > real 3m48.159s > $ time sqlite3 _.db 'CREATE INDEX wi2 ON tet (w2)' > real 9m0.107s > $ time sqlite3 _.db 'CREATE INDEX wi3 ON tet (w3)' > real 15m2.199s
> $ time sqlite3 _.db 'CREATE INDEX wi4 ON tet (w4)' > real 26m57.155s > As these indexes should be completely independent, why this time degradation? What is the original ordering of the data? In order to index the data, it needs to be sorted, and the sort can get expensive due to page thrashing. If w1 is "mostly" in order, the index will be created quite quickly. If, on the other hand, w4 is mostly reverse order, it will take some time to get all the records properly sorted and indexed. Try creating the indexes in the reverse order and see if the times are the same. > Can it be caused by a larger db file? I suppose, although I'm not sure that's directly related. Index creation is very sensitive to the number of free pages in the page cache, but for an index of that size, chances are you're always over. > To have an idea, _.db at the end of this process: > > $ du -hs _.db > 1.8G _.db > > > And, if this time degradation is derived from the file size: is there > any trick to make it faster? Increase the cache size (see PRAGMA commands). Actually, this is good practice anytime you need to create an index. -j -- Jay A. Kreibich < J A Y @ K R E I B I.C H > "'People who live in bamboo houses should not throw pandas.' Jesus said that." - "The Ninja", www.AskANinja.com, "Special Delivery 10: Pop!Tech 2006" _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
