Re: [SQL] index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 27

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 13:40:53 +0100,
> Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>Actually, Dinesh didn't mention he was using this for the speed of
>>lookup. He'd defined the columns as being the PRIMARY KEY, presumably
>>because he feels they are/should be unique. Given that they are rows
>>from a logfile, I'm not convinced this is the case.
>
>
> Even for case you could still use hashes. The odds of a false collision
> using SHA-1 are so small that some sort of disaster is more likely.
> Another possibility is if there are a fixed number of possible messages,
> is that they could be entered in their own table with a serail PK and
> the other table could reference the PK.

Certainly, but if the text in the logfile row is the same, then hashing
isn't going to make a blind bit of difference. That's the root of my
concern, and something only Dinesh knows.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd