Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Re: ORDER BY on large VARCHAR columns |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2004-10-27T22:50:04Z |
At 08:46 PM 27/10/2004 +0000, you wrote:
linkages and other noise) is 253 bytes.
That's the bad news. The good news is that you don't need compound
indexes. The optimizer is happy (even happIER) to work with a set of
single-column indexes.
If you have a requirement for uniqueness across all segments then you have
a different (architectural) problem to resolve. The language has no way to
do it for you
./heLen
>--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@t...>Unfortunately, no. The TOTAL width of an index (all segments + the
>wrote:
> >
> > An index can't be larger than 253 bytes. In many character sets
>it is
> > less, in some cases a LOT less. Also, multi-segment indexes eat
>even more
> > out of those 253 bytes.
>
>
>Yep. For me I am using UNICODE_FSS, so each segment can only be
>VARCHAR(84). Sigh.
linkages and other noise) is 253 bytes.
That's the bad news. The good news is that you don't need compound
indexes. The optimizer is happy (even happIER) to work with a set of
single-column indexes.
If you have a requirement for uniqueness across all segments then you have
a different (architectural) problem to resolve. The language has no way to
do it for you
>Lots of segments. And I may have misunderstoodThis is what you're using the RegEx UDF for, right?
>the trigger, but I think mine would be just the opposite. I would be
>inserting Full_Path, and substringing that out to each segment. Does
>that make sense?
./heLen