From: Julius.Stroffek <Julius.Stroffek@Sun.COM>
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] BUG #2737: hash indexing large tablefails,while
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 16:36:18 +0100
Message-ID: <455DD6F2.9070009@Sun.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1163761151.27956.592.camel@silverbirch.site>
References: <200611051347.kA5DlVCk032222@wwwmaster.postgresql.org>
<7530.1163202951@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1163233075.3634.944.camel@silverbirch.site>
<1884.1163717296@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1163761151.27956.592.camel@silverbirch.site>
Simon Riggs wrote:
> Do we think there is hope of improving hash indexes?
I thought about this a bit. I have an idea that the hash index might
have the fixed number of buckets specified in create index statement and
the tuples in each of these buckets should be stored in a b-tree. This
should give a constant performance improvement (but based on the number
of buckets) for each fetch of a tuple from index compared to a fetch
from b-tree index.
cheers
Julo
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: Julius.Stroffek@Sun.COM, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] BUG #2737: hash indexing large tablefails,while
In-Reply-To: <455DD6F2.9070009@Sun.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