"Ryan Bradetich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am assuming you are seeing this error in the uint_test1.sql:
> ERROR: could not find hash function for hash operator 16524
> I can bypass the error in uint_test1.sql by disabling the hash joins.
> I am going to dig in and figure out why the hash
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 08:23:05PM -0600, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >For the convenience of anyone intending to test, here is an updated
> >patch against CVS HEAD that incorporates Alex's fix.
>
> Here are the results for a table c
Hello Tom,
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ryan Bradetich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I am assuming you are seeing this error in the uint_test1.sql:
>> ERROR: could not find hash function for hash operator 16524
>> I can bypass the error in uint_test
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that the glacial speed for generating a big hash index is
> the same problem that the original code faced.
Yeah sorry, I was not saying it was a new problem with the patch. Err
at least not trying to :) *Both* o
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Alex Hunsaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> create table test_hash(num int8);
> insert into test_hash (num) select generate_series(1, 200);
> create index test_hash_num_idx on test_hash (num);
>
> pgbench -c1 -n -t1 -f bench_index.sql
> cvs head: tps = 3161.50
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Alex Hunsaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW Im still planning on doing a wide vs narrow test... sometime... :)
narrow: (exactly the same as what I just did in the other post)
create table test_hash(num int8);
insert into test_hash (num) select generate_series(1,
