|
|
|
|
|
by valenterry
907 days ago
|
|
If a table has 100 rows and those rows aren't huuuuge, there is no reason to put in index. The rows probably fit into one page or so anyways and are all read together anyways. Why are you mentioning that it were Java devs ad that you are a JS (javascript?) dev? Does that give you any kind of... expertise in the matter? |
|
With correct indexes the queries were able to be found only with index lookup without touching data at all. It was many times faster than sequential scan of even this few rows.
I'm mentioning our respective roles to show that people with nominally no expertise make such decisions often in practice and such "memes", even tough they are not strictly true in all cases, may bring a lot of value in practical setting.
"No inedex = slow" is a good heuristic for nearly all devs.