Re: Why is Hash index not transaction safe.
От | Paul Linehan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why is Hash index not transaction safe. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAF4RT5RKPgctY+HSk-8odvTFik38fQJS=34x3p57XgxdFYfL3A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why is Hash index not transaction safe. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
HI all, I have the file postmaster.pid - I would like to know what the lines mean? I did Google, but didn't find much. ====================================== [pol@localhost inst]$ more ./data/postmaster.pid 7382 /home/pol/Downloads/software/postgres/inst/./data 1430769205 5432 /tmp localhost 5432001 2195471 [pol@localhost inst]$ ======================================= "inst" is the base install of the PostgreSQL instance. 7382 is the process id of the .../inst/bin/postgres -D ./data process I'm curious as to what this line /home/pol/Downloads/software/postgres/inst/./data means The PostgreSQL install is in /home/pol/Downloads/software/postgres/inst/, but what does the bit of the path inst/./data - I'm unclear as to what the . (dot) in the middle of that path means. Is the 1430769205 a UNIX epoch time (seconds since 1970) since the instance started? 5432 is the port (configurable) /tmp - the PostgreSQL temp (sorting) directory? localhost is my machine name (never bothered to give it anything meaningful). It's the last line 5432001 2195471 that really puzzled me - I don't have a clue what they are about. I'd be grateful for any input on this matter, TIA and rgs, Pól Ua Laoínecháin 2015-05-04 5:11 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Wei Shan <weishan.ang@gmail.com> writes: >> I read the following about Hash indexes in Heroku's blog ( >> https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/postgresql-indexes) > >> *Hash Indexes are only useful for equality comparisons, but you pretty much >> never want to use them since they are not transaction safe, need to be >> manually rebuilt after crashes, and are not replicated to followers, so the >> advantage over using a B-Tree is rather small.* > >> Could anyone explain about why is it not transaction safe as compared to >> B-Tree index. > > They're not crash-safe because they don't have any WAL support, and > WAL-based replication doesn't work for the same reason. But I think > the bit about not being transaction-safe is nonsense ... > > regards, tom lane > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice -- linehanp@tcd.ie Mob: 00 353 86 864 5772
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: