| From: | "Julius(dot)Stroffek" <Julius(dot)Stroffek(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] BUG #2737: hash indexing large tablefails,while |
| Date: | 2006-11-17 15:36:18 |
| Message-ID: | 455DD6F2.9070009@Sun.COM |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-performance |
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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | carlos | 2006-11-17 15:47:56 | BUG #2763: fat |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-17 15:08:47 | Re: [PERFORM] BUG #2737: hash indexing large tablefails, while btree of same index works |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Frost | 2006-11-17 17:45:42 | availability of SATA vendors |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-17 15:08:47 | Re: [PERFORM] BUG #2737: hash indexing large tablefails, while btree of same index works |