Re: HASH: Out of overflow pages. Out of luck
От | Christopher Kings-Lynne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: HASH: Out of overflow pages. Out of luck |
Дата | |
Msg-id | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOEEHPCDAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | HASH: Out of overflow pages. Out of luck ("Gene Selkov, Jr." <selkovjr@xnet.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> I saw Tom answer a similar question a year ago, by saying that the > hash access method is poorly supported and that there is no advantage > to using it. I am not sure about the former, but the latter is not > entirely true: we saw at least 20% gain in performance when we > switched from btree to hash, and my boss considers 20% a big enough > improvement. Besides, he knows the database theory and he is a > long-time BerkelyDB user, and in his world, hash is greatly superior > to btree, so he is wondering why are the postgres implementations so > close. Besides, it's a tough challenge to explain it to a Libertarian > that he'd better not do something. > > I guess we can make such people happy by either fixing hash, or by > making btree very much worse -- whichever is easier :) Cool. I'm sure that making btree much worse is definitely within my ability - I'll submit a patch shortly with new pg_bench results. Chris
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: