Re: why choosing an hash index instead of the btree version even if the cost is lower?

From: Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why choosing an hash index instead of the btree version even if the cost is lower?
Date: 2022-11-18 16:17:55
Message-ID: CAKoxK+71YQA3GM8iXSkVZnofBq1tpdz-LprMOdZcs+jk7Nrhmg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 3:55 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Even more to the point: if the total costs are fuzzily the same,
> then the next point of comparison will be the startup costs,
> which is where the hash index wins.

Thanks, it is clear now.

Luca

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sengottaiyan T 2022-11-19 02:58:31 Need suggestion to set-up RDS alerts on GP3 volumes
Previous Message Luca Ferrari 2022-11-18 16:16:37 Re: why choosing an hash index instead of the btree version even if the cost is lower?