Re: Ignore hash indices on replicas

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Steven Schlansker <steven(at)likeness(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Ignore hash indices on replicas
Date: 2012-08-20 03:01:30
Message-ID: CAOR=d=19idTXka8_uFonhwOWOcRNmX3qeHTM+7ZzWp7Pv+K1nw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Steven Schlansker <steven(at)likeness(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm using Postgres hash indices on a streaming replica master.
> As is documented, hash indices are not logged, so the replica does not have access to them.
>
> I understand that the current wisdom is "don't use hash indices", but (unfortunately?) I have benchmarks that
> show that our particular application is faster by quite a bit when a hash index is available.

You could use a slony slave and have different indexes etc between
master and slave but it's more complex to setup, maintain and monitor
for most people.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Johnston 2012-08-20 03:13:01 Re: How hard would a "path" operator be to implement in PostgreSQL
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2012-08-20 03:01:22 citext: citext=text is case sensitive