| From: | David Roussel <pgsql-performance(at)diroussel(dot)xsmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ying Lu <ying_lu(at)cs(dot)concordia(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-perform <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL 8.0) |
| Date: | 2005-05-09 22:38:47 |
| Message-ID: | 6f6c081fabe7002128433e3b99b09e50@diroussel.xsmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
> *Note: * Testing has shown PostgreSQL's hash indexes to perform no
> better than B-tree indexes, and the index size and build time for hash
> indexes is much worse. For these reasons, hash index use is presently
> discouraged.
>
> May I know for simple "=" operation query, for "Hash index" vs.
> "B-tree" index, which can provide better performance please?
If you trust the documentation use a b-tree. If you don't trust the
documentation do your own tests.
please don't cross post.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hrishikesh Deshmukh | 2005-05-09 22:53:45 | Re: Data Modelling Tools |
| Previous Message | Dann Corbit | 2005-05-09 22:32:56 | Re: Data Modelling Tools |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-10 00:14:11 | Re: [PERFORM] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2005-05-09 21:46:23 | Re: PGSQL Capacity |