From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Steven Schlansker <steven(at)likeness(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Ignore hash indices on replicas |
Date: | 2012-08-19 21:37:41 |
Message-ID: | 1345412261.20987.27.camel@jdavis |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 00:09 -0700, Steven Schlansker wrote:
> I understand that the current wisdom is "don't use hash indices", but
> (unfortunately?) I have benchmarks that
> show that our particular application is faster by quite a bit when a
> hash index is available.
Can you publish the results somewhere? It might provoke some interest.
> I assume that fixing the hash index logging issue hasn't been a
> priority due to low interest / technical limitations, but I'm curious
> for a stopgap measure -- can we somehow configure Postgres to ignore
> hash indices on a replica, using other b-tree indices or even a
> sequential scan? I know I can do this on a per-connection basis by
> disabling various index lookup methods, but it'd be nice if it just
> ignored invalid indices on its own.
This might work for you:
http://sigaev.ru/git/gitweb.cgi?p=plantuner.git;a=blob;hb=HEAD;f=README.plantuner
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Travers | 2012-08-20 01:28:57 | How hard would a "path" operator be to implement in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Raju Angani | 2012-08-19 20:48:48 | xml performance |