| From: | Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Indexes |
| Date: | 2016-09-21 19:44:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAEzk6feXy6zcfnJcF3=mDVXqDB=qsnM1=WeXGCu1vLdhmN_cdw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 September 2016 at 13:29, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'd be curious what benefits people expect to get.
An edge case I came across the other day was a unique index on a large
string: postgresql popped up and told me that I couldn't insert a
value into the field because the BTREE-index-based constraint wouldn't
support the size of string, and that I should use a HASH index
instead. Which, of course, I can't, because it's fairly clearly
deprecated in the documentation...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2016-09-21 21:46:35 | Re: Better tracking of free space during SP-GiST index build |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-21 19:35:44 | Re: Hash Indexes |