Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:

I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.


Neil Conway wrote:
> Attached is a patch that implements unique hash indexes. Regression
> tests and docs have been updated (with the exception of
> src/backend/access/hash/README).
> This patches implements an improved version of the concurrency changes I
> outlined on -hackers a couple days ago: the separate lock for
> "right-of-insertion" into a bucket chain has been replaced by making use
> of existing lmgr lockmodes to get the behavior we need.
> I also took the opportunity to refactor the hash index code in a couple
> places by moving duplicated code into separate functions, fixed some
> typos in the README file, etc.
> I've tested this a little bit (it survives 100,000 single-user pgbench
> transactions, and 10 concurrent clients doing 1000 transactions each),
> but I need to do more testing in the future.
> As far as I know, the unique hash index code is functionally complete,
> but don't add this to the patch queue (it is obviously for 7.5, anyway),
> since I'm about to get started on some related hash index work, for
> which I'll submit a mega-patch containing everything. I just posted this
> here so that anyone who's interested can take a look at it -- comments
> are welcome.
> Thanks to Tom Lane, who was very helpful when I asked him code
> questions, including suggesting the improved concurrency design I
> mentioned above.
> Cheers,
> Neil

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>       joining column's datatypes do not match

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to