Re: [GENERAL] hash taboo?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: admin <admin(at)wtbwts(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] hash taboo?
Date: 1999-12-18 03:46:14
Message-ID: 199912180346.WAA06174@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> My results were exactly the same for btree and hash, even when vacumming
> between each index creation. Here's my query:
> SELECT * FROM prod_base WHERE mid='2';
>
> Here's my result:
> Index Scan using prod_mid_idx on prod_base (cost=2.05 rows=2 width=120)
>
> My database is perhaps not big enough to run some relevant tests, so
> please let me know if there's another way I could get a better idea of the
> resources used for using each searching method.

You have to look at index creation speed and index access speed.

Not sure which one wins in each category. Also, index modification
speed may be important.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-12-18 03:56:03 Re: [GENERAL] hash taboo?
Previous Message pawel 1999-12-18 03:24:43 query buffer max length of 16384 exceeded