Re: Combining hash values
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Combining hash values |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6883.1470065235@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Combining hash values (Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Combining hash values
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes: > On that subject, while looking at hashfunc.c, I spotted that > hashint8() has a very obvious deficiency, which causes disastrous > performance with certain inputs: Well, if you're trying to squeeze 64 bits into a 32-bit result, there are always going to be collisions somewhere. > I'd suggest using hash_uint32() for values that fit in a 32-bit > integer and hash_any() otherwise. Perhaps, but this'd break existing hash indexes. That might not be a fatal objection, but if we're going to put users through that I'd like to think a little bigger in terms of the benefits we get. I've thought for some time that we needed to move to 64-bit hash function results, because the size of problem that's reasonable to use a hash join or hash aggregation for keeps increasing. Maybe we should do that and fix hashint8 as a side effect. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: