From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
Cc: KÖPFERL Robert <robert.koepferl@sonorys.at>
Cc: 'dpandey@secf.com' <dpandey@secf.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org, 'PostgreSQL' <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [SQL] index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 27
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 14:33:24 -0500
Message-ID: <20050602193324.GA2861@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <429F3B21.9020209@archonet.com>
References: <ED4E30DD9C43D5118DFB00508BBBA76EB16736@neptun.sonorys.at>
<429EFE55.3050601@archonet.com>
<20050602163542.GA23150@wolff.to>
<429F3B21.9020209@archonet.com>
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 18:00:17 +0100,
Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> wrote:
>
> Certainly, but if the text in the logfile row is the same, then hashing
> isn't going to make a blind bit of difference. That's the root of my
> concern, and something only Dinesh knows.
Sure it is. Because the hash can be used in the primary key instead of
of the error message which should reduce the size of the key enough
that he can use a btree index.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, dev@archonet.com, robert.koepferl@sonorys.at, dpandey@secf.com
Subject: Re: [SQL] index row size 2728 exceeds btree maximum, 27
In-Reply-To: <20050602193324.GA2861@wolff.to>
* 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