[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] SQL Query Performance

[Joshua D. Drake]

On 04/26/2013 12:21 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd at commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Dropping the partial index and only relying on asset.copy(barcode):
>
> Dropping the partial index also means dropping the constraint
> enforcing the uniqueness of non-deleted item barcodes.  That's a
> pretty important constraint as far as the business logic is concerned.
>
> Of course, there is nothing preventing an Evergreen user from *also*
> adding a full (non-unique) index on asset.copy (barcode); that could
> certainly be useful if they expect to be doing a lot of ad hoc queries
> on withdrawn items where the barcode is a relevant query filter.

Granted if a unique index is required we can use a unique index as well. 
My only point was adding a secondary partial index was probably not the 
way to go and that adding a generic index on barcode would service the 
user better.

JD


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC
@cmdpromptinc - 509-416-6579