My limited personal experience is that LLMs are better than the average therapsit.
InnoDB uses a clustered index approach. The primary key index is a B-tree. The actual table data is stored in the leaf nodes of this B-tree. Secondary indexes point to the primary key.
One is not better than the other in general terms. InnoDB's clustered B-tree approach shines when:
You frequently access data in primary key order
Your workload has many range scans on the primary key
You need predictable performance for primary key lookups
Your data naturally has a meaningful ordering that matches your access patterns
PostgreSQL's heap approach excels when:
You frequently update non-key columns (less page splits/reorganization)
You have many secondary indexes (they're smaller without primary keys)
Your access patterns vary widely and don't follow one particular field
You need faster table scans when indexes aren't applicable
I personally find PostgreSQL's approach more flexible for complex analytical workloads with unpredictable access patterns, while InnoDB's clustered approach feels more optimized for OLTP workloads with predictable key-based access patterns. The "better" system depends entirely on your specific workload, data characteristics, and access patterns.
There’s a market for these types of businesses. In my area there’s a dude with a company that sells and maintains $50-150k+ Christmas light and decoration displays. He has ~100 customers. The men’s clothing place I go to is a group of guys hanging out having a good time - it doesn’t look busy, but their 4-5 customers a day are dropping $3-10k/visit.
Stores like that are “laundering” money like the rest of the commercial real estate world… by playing games with various (legal) tax schemes. They are no more illegal than a Hampton Inn or AirBnb guy.
Real money laundering places are restaurant/bar, laundromats, arcades, and low income residential.