Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>,<mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,<pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
Date: 2011-09-18 15:17:17
Message-ID: 4E75C52D02000025000412BE@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Stefan Keller wrote:

> It's hard for me to imagine that btree is superior for all the
> issues mentioned before.

It would be great if you could show a benchmark technique which shows
otherwise.

-Kevin

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Keller 2011-09-18 19:31:55 Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
Previous Message Stefan Keller 2011-09-18 14:59:10 Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?