From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)sun(dot)com>, "Xiao Meng" <mx(dot)cogito(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Date: | 2008-09-05 02:17:07 |
Message-ID: | 11962.1220581027@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> So what we need for testing is a few different key values that hash to
>> the same code. Not sure about an easy way to find such.
> Hrm, well I have not really looked at the hash algorithm but I assume
> we could just reduce the number of buckets?
No, we need fully equal hash keys, else the code won't visit the heap.
I guess one thing we could do for testing purposes is lobotomize one of
the datatype-specific hash functions. For instance, make int8_hash
return the input mod 2^32, ignoring the upper bytes. Then it'd be easy
to compute different int8s that hash to the same thing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:19:05 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:04:57 | Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Implement Boyer-Moore searching (First time hacker) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:19:05 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:04:57 | Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Implement Boyer-Moore searching (First time hacker) |