Re: Why hash indexes suck

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu
Cc: Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why hash indexes suck
Date: 2004-06-05 20:31:12
Message-ID: 689.1086467472@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu> writes:
> This is probably a crazy idea, but is it possible to organize the data
> in a page of a hash bucket as a binary tree ?

Only if you want to require a hash opclass to supply ordering operators,
which sort of defeats the purpose I think. Hash is only supposed to
need equality not ordering.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2004-06-05 22:22:19 Re: pg_class could not be found
Previous Message Sailesh Krishnamurthy 2004-06-05 20:15:25 Re: Why hash indexes suck

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-06-05 20:43:39 Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-06-05 20:24:05 Re: I/O support for composite types