From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Naz Gassiep <naz(at)mira(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: todo: Hash index creation |
Date: | 2007-07-02 02:44:07 |
Message-ID: | 20662.1183344247@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Naz Gassiep <naz(at)mira(dot)net> writes:
> As a result, when creating tables containing large blocks of text I wish
> to index, I've been using HASH as an index method. Please can we state
> in the manual that HASH index types are in a beta stage of development
> or something similar, or perhaps remove the manual entry altogether
> until HASH is at a point where it is usable in production.
Uh, the manual already does say
Note: Testing has shown PostgreSQL's hash indexes to perform no better
than B-tree indexes, and the index size and build time for hash indexes
is much worse. Furthermore, hash index operations are not presently
WAL-logged, so hash indexes might need to be rebuilt with REINDEX after
a database crash. For these reasons, hash index use is presently
discouraged.
under 11.2 Index Types, as well as various derogatory remarks elsewhere.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-07-02 05:09:16 | Re: what is difference between LOCAL and GLOBAL TEMP TABLES in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Naz Gassiep | 2007-07-02 02:27:50 | Re: todo: Hash index creation |