Re: hash index improving v3
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200809241604.m8OG4Mk21483@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: hash index improving v3 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: hash index improving v3
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Can we consider this hash thread closed/completed? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > > Thinks: Why not just sort all of the time and skip the debate entirely? > > The sort is demonstrably a loser for smaller indexes. Admittedly, > if the index is small then the sort can't cost all that much, but if > the (correct) threshold is some large fraction of shared_buffers then > it could still take awhile on installations with lots-o-buffers. > > The other side of that coin is that it's not clear this is really worth > arguing about, much less exposing a separate parameter for. > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: