| 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 02:19:05 |
| Message-ID: | 12087.1220581145@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 7:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> * check that the queries actually use the indexes (not sure that the
>> proposed switch settings ensure this, not to mention you didn't create
>> the indexes)
> Well I was assuming I could just test the speed of a hash join...
Uh, no, hash joins have nearly zip to do with hash indexes. They rely
on the same per-datatype support functions but that's the end of the
commonality.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2008-09-05 02:48:43 | Re: Need more reviewers! |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:17:07 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2008-09-05 03:48:41 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-05 02:17:07 | Re: hash index improving v3 |