Re: New data type: uniqueidentifier
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Dmitry G. Mastrukov" <dmitry@taurussoft.org>
Cc: "Alex Pilosov" <alex@pilosoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2001-06-28T15:12:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Dmitry G. Mastrukov" <dmitry@taurussoft.org> writes: > Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Dmitry G. Mastrukov wrote: > I've marked "=" operator with HASH clause (and planner has started to > use > hash jons). But as I understand the right way is to create special hash > function (may be wrapper for hash_any(), isn't it?) and register it for > hash > as for btree method. >> >> No. Currently, there's no way to specify a hash function for a given >> operator, it always uses a builtin function that operates on memory >> representation of a value. > Strange. When I execute following query (slightly modified query from User's > Guide chapter 7.6) You're looking at support for hash indexes, which have nothing to do with hash joins. *Why* they have nothing to do with hash joins, I dunno. You'd think that using the same hash functions for both would be a good idea. But that's not how it's set up at the moment. regards, tom lane