| From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Indexes for hashes |
| Date: | 2016-06-17 03:51:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAGTBQpY7apkp79d2a+mgz-o0MggLrY-nGaMFZBjvGCuvyAA75A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I have an application which stores a large amounts of hex-encoded hash
> strings (nearly 100 GB of them), which means:
>
> The number of distinct characters (alphabet) is limited to 16
> Each string is of the same length, 64 characters
> The strings are essentially random
>
> Creating a B-Tree index on this results in the index size being larger than
> the table itself, and there are disk space constraints.
>
> I've found the SP-GIST radix tree index, and thought it could be a good
> match for the data because of the above constraints. An attempt to create it
> (as in CREATE INDEX ON t USING spgist(field_name)) apparently takes more
> than 12 hours (while a similar B-tree index takes a few hours at most), so
> I've interrupted it because "it probably is not going to finish in a
> reasonable time". Some slides I found on the spgist index allude that both
> build time and size are not really suitable for this purpose.
I've found that hash btree indexes tend to perform well in these situations:
CREATE INDEX ON t USING btree (hashtext(fieldname));
However, you'll have to modify your queries to query for both, the
hashtext and the text itself:
SELECT * FROM t WHERE hashtext(fieldname) = hashtext('blabla') AND
fieldname = 'blabla';
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-06-17 03:57:32 | Re: 9.6 query slower than 9.5.3 |
| Previous Message | Adam Brusselback | 2016-06-17 03:36:22 | Re: 9.6 query slower than 9.5.3 |