Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
[blink] This seems to miss out on the actual point of the thread (hash
bucket size shouldn't be a disk page) in favor of an entirely
unsupported sub-suggestion.
Yes, I was unsure of the text myself. I have
Added to TODO:
* Order heap pointers on hash index pages by hash value and ctid
---
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
We could safely sort on the hash value, but I'm not sure how effective
that would be,
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Added to TODO:
* Order heap pointers on hash index pages by hash value and ctid
[blink] This seems to miss out on the actual point of the thread (hash
bucket size shouldn't be a disk page) in favor of an entirely
unsupported sub-suggestion.
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Added to TODO:
* Order heap pointers on hash index pages by hash value and ctid
[blink] This seems to miss out on the actual point of the thread (hash
bucket size shouldn't be a disk page) in favor of an entirely
unsupported
We could safely sort on the hash value, but I'm not sure how effective
that would be, considering that we're talking about values that already
hashed into the same bucket --- there's likely not to be very many
distinct hash values there.
I think we can safely put that on the todo list.
The
Sailesh Krishnamurthy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is probably a crazy idea, but is it possible to organize the data
in a page of a hash bucket as a binary tree ?
Only if you want to require a hash opclass to supply ordering operators,
which sort of defeats the purpose I think. Hash is
Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There seems to be something seriously defective with hash indexes in old
versions of PostgreSQL.
They still suck; I'm not aware of any situation where I'd recommend hash
over btree indexes in Postgres. I think we have fixed the hash indexes'
deadlock
Sailesh Krishnamurthy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is probably a crazy idea, but is it possible to organize the data
in a page of a hash bucket as a binary tree ?
Only if you want to require a hash opclass to supply ordering operators,
which sort of defeats the purpose I think. Hash is only
On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 13:31, Tom Lane wrote:
Only if you want to require a hash opclass to supply ordering operators,
which sort of defeats the purpose I think. Hash is only supposed to
need equality not ordering.
Is it possible to assume some kind of ordering (i.e. strcmp() the binary
data
Jeff Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 13:31, Tom Lane wrote:
Only if you want to require a hash opclass to supply ordering operators,
which sort of defeats the purpose I think. Hash is only supposed to
need equality not ordering.
Is it possible to assume some kind of
10 matches
Mail list logo
