X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34E854ADF;
	Wed, 11 May 2005 11:15:03 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 17677-01; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:14:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mailbox.samurai.com (mailbox.samurai.com [205.207.28.82])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D536054994;
	Wed, 11 May 2005 11:14:57 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (mailbox.samurai.com [205.207.28.82])
	by mailbox.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F47318CC14;
	Wed, 11 May 2005 10:15:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailbox.samurai.com ([205.207.28.82])
	by localhost (mailbox.samurai.com [205.207.28.82]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024)
	with LMTP id 37124-01; Wed, 11 May 2005 10:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.4] (r220-101-4-60.cpe.unwired.net.au [220.101.4.60])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mailbox.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1591B18CC15;
	Wed, 11 May 2005 10:14:53 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4282135A.8000909@samurai.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 00:14:50 +1000
From: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>,
	Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@gmail.com>,
	Ying Lu <ying_lu@cs.concordia.ca>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL
References: <427F6853.90308@cs.concordia.ca> <427F757A.8000407@samurai.com>
	<59d991c405050908271b55e673@mail.gmail.com>
	<427F8321.5030702@samurai.com> <20050509163423.GH35026@decibel.org>
	<427F9211.2090008@samurai.com> <20050509165133.GJ35026@decibel.org>
	<427FFCD3.1010803@samurai.com> <4407.1115698257@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<428037A2.4060304@samurai.com> <6686.1115700888@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<878y2nsj7i.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
	<428209BA.8070907@samurai.com> <3485.1115819827@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <3485.1115819827@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mailbox.samurai.com
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.008 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200505/562
X-Sequence-Number: 77910

Tom Lane wrote:
> Performance?

I'll run some benchmarks tomorrow, as it's rather late in my time zone. 
If anyone wants to post some benchmark results, they are welcome to.

> I disagree completely with the idea of forcing this behavior for all
> datatypes.  It could only be sensible for fairly wide values; you don't
> save enough to justify the lossiness otherwise.

I think it would be premature to decide about this before we see some 
performance numbers. I'm not fundamentally opposed, though.

> [ BTW, posting patches to pgsql-general seems pretty off-topic. ]

Not any more than discussing implementation details is :) But your point 
is well taken, I'll send future patches to -patches.

-Neil