Horton

Re: Hash Indexes

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-09-21T19:12:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 08:29:59AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Of course, if we want to implement clustered indexes, that's going to
> require significant changes to the heap format ... or the ability to
> support multiple heap storage formats.  I'm not opposed to that, but I
> think it makes sense to fix the existing implementation first.

For me, there are several measurements for indexes:

	Build time
	INSERT / UPDATE overhead
	Storage size
	Access speed

I am guessing people make conclusions based on their Computer Science
education.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +

Commits

  1. Remove _hash_wrtbuf() in favor of calling MarkBufferDirty().

  2. Fix race introduced by 6d46f4783efe457f74816a75173eb23ed8930020.

  3. Improve hash index bucket split behavior.

  4. Reduce pinning and buffer content locking for btree scans.