Re: [HACKERS] Multicolumn hash indexes
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Multicolumn hash indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19865.1506696895@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Multicolumn hash indexes (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Multicolumn hash indexes
Re: [HACKERS] Multicolumn hash indexes |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Maybe you're worrying about something like a billion-row table where > there are 3 columns that form a composite key: (1,1,1), (1,1,2), ..., > (1,1000),(1,2,1),...,(1,1000,1000),(2,1,1),...,(1000,1000,1000). In > that case, treating the leading column as most important will indeed > be terrible, since we'll put all billion rows into 1000 buckets no > matter how many bucket splits we do. > That seems a little unusual, though. There are few if any indexing techniques where the first column isn't significantly more important than the rest --- certainly that's true for btree, for example. I do not think it's a showstopper if that's true for hash as well. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: