Re: Index performance

Niall Smart wrote:
> >Insert into an indexed table will take more time than an
> >non-indexed table. This is obvious because each insert
> >has to update the index also.
> Isn't the drop from 6 seconds to 55 seconds a bit excessive though? I
> didn't think indexes slowed updates *that* much?

Remember that the insert is going straight into the table whereas the indexes must be updated. Not only do you incur the extra read(s) and writes to the index but you also get all the REDO Log activity as well.

55 sec sounds a bit excessive so I would say there are bottlenecks in the performance of the disk.

Bruce...

--
  -----------------
   T T T T T T T T        Bruce Pihlamae
   I I I I I I I I        bpihlama_at_nla.gov.au
   I I I I I I I I        National Library of Australia
   T T T T T T T T        Phone: +616 262-1575
  -----------------       Fax:   +616 273-2116
 ===================
 "If you swallow a live frog first thing in the morning;
  nothing worse will happen to either of you that day."