Re: Hash Indexes

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hash Indexes
Date: 2016-09-21 19:12:43
Message-ID: 20160921191243.GA7630@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 08:29:59AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Of course, if we want to implement clustered indexes, that's going to
> require significant changes to the heap format ... or the ability to
> support multiple heap storage formats. I'm not opposed to that, but I
> think it makes sense to fix the existing implementation first.

For me, there are several measurements for indexes:

Build time
INSERT / UPDATE overhead
Storage size
Access speed

I am guessing people make conclusions based on their Computer Science
education.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-09-21 19:35:44 Re: Hash Indexes
Previous Message David Fetter 2016-09-21 18:46:24 Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql)