Re: Why hash indexes suck

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why hash indexes suck
Date: 2004-06-10 11:56:47
Message-ID: 200406101156.i5ABulF10175@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> [blink] This seems to miss out on the actual point of the thread (hash
> >> bucket size shouldn't be a disk page) in favor of an entirely
> >> unsupported sub-suggestion.
>
> > Yes, I was unsure of the text myself. I have changed it to:
> > * Allow hash buckets to fill disk pages, rather than being
> > sparse
>
> OK, though maybe "pack hash index buckets onto disk pages more
> efficiently" would be clearer.

OK, updated.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2004-06-10 11:57:59 Re: Improving postgresql.conf
Previous Message SZŰCS Gábor 2004-06-10 09:40:59 Re: simple_heap_update: tuple concurrently updated -- during INSERT