On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 09:46 +0800, Xiao Meng wrote: > 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.
You don't give the text of the query used to do these performance tests, so I can't validate your test results. Right now it seems strange that the index is larger than a btree, yet the performance tests show that 3 times as much I/O was used accessing the btree. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
