
A Curated Guide to PostgreSQL - b14ck
http://postgresguide.com/
======
james4k
> Its of note that Postgres does not automatically create an index when
> creating the primary key, it is a separate step which you must do if not
> using an ORM. ([http://postgresguide.com/performance/indexes.html#primary-
> ke...](http://postgresguide.com/performance/indexes.html#primary-keys-and-
> indexes))

This directly contradicts with what the PostgreSQL documentation says.

> Adding a primary key will automatically create a unique btree index on the
> column or group of columns used in the primary key.
> ([http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/ddl-
> constrain...](http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/ddl-
> constraints.html#AEN2493))

Is there a fundamental difference to the default pkey index versus an
explicitly created index?

~~~
joevandyk
perhaps he meant a foreign key, not primary key.

postgresql doesn't automatically create indexes for foreign keys.

> Is there a fundamental difference to the default pkey index versus an
> explicitly created index?

i don't know of any in practice.

~~~
craigkerstiens
You're correct it was intended to be foreign keys, correctly updated now.

I believe the difference would be on the constraint. A primary key is intended
to be unique, where as an index does not alway carry that constraint.

------
sciurus
They ink to PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance
(<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/184951030X/>), which I agree is a great
book if you're a sysadmin supporting PostgreSQL.

~~~
elchief
what's up w the third book link tho? some crappy book by a guy named CJ

~~~
lobster_johnson
C. J. Date is a very well known technical writer. He has written extensively
about SQL and relational theory.

------
wulczer
While the idea is nice, please note that the official name is PostgreSQL and
Postgres is an accepted alias. "Postgre SQL" is just plain wrong.

~~~
ken
It's wrong, but probably unavoidable. Attaching a spoken acronym to the end of
a pronounced name is just so bizarre (has anyone else ever done that?) that
people will simply skip it.

I've heard people say "post-gre", and like a new English speaker saying "We
goed to the park", this overgeneralization isn't at all surprising. In
computers, acronyms _after_ names are very common, and it's typically harmless
to omit them, e.g., saying "Windows XP" as "Windows" is more generic but not
wrong.

I've never heard anybody ever say "post-gres-que-ell". ("Postgres" is correct,
unambiguous, and sounds better. Why would I keep going and make it twice as
many syllables?) They're trying to fight against the natural process of
linguistic clipping with a FAQ!

I love Postgres as a database but I really wish they'd just drop that weird
spelling. I don't think it's helping them at all these days.

~~~
fusiongyro
> I've never heard anybody ever say "post-gres-que-ell".

I frequently, but not exclusively, say it like that. You knew someone would
show up to say this. I admit I get weird looks. My coworkers all call it
"Postgres."

I think you're right, but I also think if that's the best thing we have to
complain about we have it pretty good.

------
davidw
"Curated"? As opposed to a what, an automatically generated one?

SELECT RANDOM(GUIDE) FROM DATABASES WHERE DATABASE_NAME = 'POSTGRES'; ?!

The original article, thankfully, says nothing about being "curated".

