| From: | "Xiao Meng" <mx(dot)cogito(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | hash index improving v3 |
| Date: | 2008-08-18 01:46:06 |
| Message-ID: | ded849dd0808171846g2c6c65adub942bd2510a6c94f@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
There's minor change against the previous one(
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg01183.php ).
* merge branch master(Aug 16) into the patch
* clean code and make some comment
Performance result is here
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Gsoc08-hashindex
It seems hash index is a little better on index creation and selection.
But maybe it's in the range of noise, I'm not sure.
I'd like to try it with a bigger dataset (e.g. table with 10GB) but there is
not enough space in my computer.
Anyone interest can make a test on a bigger data set.
--
Best Regards,
Xiao Meng
DKERC, Harbin Institute of Technology, China
Gtalk: mx(dot)cogito(at)gmail(dot)com
MSN: cnEnder(at)live(dot)com
http://xiaomeng.yo2.cn
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| hash-v3.patch | text/x-diff | 21.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-08-18 03:23:07 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2008-08-18 00:07:55 | Re: proposal sql: labeled function params |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2008-08-18 07:38:52 | WITH RECURSIVE patches 0818 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-08-07 16:05:14 | Re: Infrastructure changes for recovery |