| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Indexes |
| Date: | 2016-09-30 00:07:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZT++pRSLzyKxOi8EX6cxmpJwcO3HLMRXGOJohk5wqbiPw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-09-28 15:04:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Andres already
>> stated that he things working on btree-over-hash would be more
>> beneficial than fixing hash, but at this point it seems like he's the
>> only one who takes that position.
>
> Note that I did *NOT* take that position. I was saying that I think we
> should evaluate whether that's not a better approach, doing some simple
> performance comparisons.
I, for one, agree with this position.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-30 00:10:40 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-29 22:08:53 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade from 9.5 to 9.6 fails with "invalid argument" |