Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
Дата
Msg-id CAEYLb_Udue8_XSE9K0KMqKBE_62yurv1bY4Wc+qJoGykZ_rXtA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?  (Stefan Keller <sfkeller@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
Дерево обсуждения 
On 14 September 2011 00:04, Stefan Keller <sfkeller@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has this been verified on a recent release? I can't believe that hash
> performs so bad over all these points. Theory tells me otherwise and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_table seems to be a success.

Hash indexes have been improved since 2005 - their performance was
improved quite a bit in 9.0. Here's a more recent analysis:

http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/06/28/should-you-use-hash-index/

--
Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Samuel Gendler
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: raid array seek performance
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?