| ▲ | tomnipotent 2 hours ago | |
I think OP is just alluding to the fact that Postgres needs to do less work to go from secondary index to table data, since the tid is a direct pointer to the exact page and slotted entry while MySQL needs a b-tree walk. > primary key index will be mostly cached so the cost of the indirection is much smaller than it may first appear Not sure I follow. If it's in-memory you save having to read from disk, but you still have to walk the b-tree to go from PK to data. | ||
| ▲ | barrkel an hour ago | parent [-] | |
MySQL was generally (pre 8) optimized for point queries on primary keys. So rows are stored in the PK index, the PK index is a clustered index. Everything more or less falls out of this. | ||