From: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
To: Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@gmail.com>
Cc: Ying Lu <ying_lu@cs.concordia.ca>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 01:34:57 +1000
Message-ID: <427F8321.5030702@samurai.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59d991c405050908271b55e673@mail.gmail.com>
References: <427F6853.90308@cs.concordia.ca>
<427F757A.8000407@samurai.com>
<59d991c405050908271b55e673@mail.gmail.com>
Christopher Petrilli wrote:
> This being the case, is there ever ANY reason for someone to use it?
Well, someone might fix it up at some point in the future. I don't think
there's anything fundamentally wrong with hash indexes, it is just that
the current implementation is a bit lacking.
> If not, then shouldn't we consider deprecating it and eventually
> removing it.
I would personally consider the code to be deprecated already.
I don't think there is much to be gained b removing it: the code is
pretty isolated from the rest of the tree, and (IMHO) not a significant
maintenance burden.
-Neil
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: neilc@samurai.com, petrilli@gmail.com, ying_lu@cs.concordia.ca, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL
In-Reply-To: <427F8321.5030702@samurai.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox