From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)googlemail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WIP: Deferrable unique constraints |
Date: | 2009-07-14 19:13:33 |
Message-ID: | 1247598813.5902.42.camel@monkey-cat.sm.truviso.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 13:29 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> I am looking at adding unique support to hash indexes for 8.5 and
> they will definitely need to visit the heap.
Have you seen this patch?
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1246840119.19547.126.camel@jdavis
This patch will support unique constraints for hash indexes as well.
There may still be a use-case for specialized hash index unique
constraints, similar to btree, but please follow the work to make sure
that no work is wasted.
Also, I don't see a problem with using the same hacks in the hash index
code as is used in the btree index code. If you see a better way, or if
you think index AM changes would be useful to you as well, you should
probably open that discussion.
I was trying to provide an alternative to an index AM API change,
because I thought there might be some resistance to that. However, if
there are multiple index AMs that can make use of it, there is a
stronger case for an API change.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-07-14 19:28:23 | Re: WIP: Deferrable unique constraints |
Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2009-07-14 19:12:28 | Filtering dictionaries support and unaccent dictionary |