Re: [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
Cc: Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.
Date: 2016-02-04 16:27:25
Message-ID: CAM3SWZRM-gF-UsvUwHKL8+fVcyhwr6sfJunVJjyy4_ZrNcNWKg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>
> No, I'm not. I've just realised that all I've been checking is the
> primary key expecting it to change in size, which is, of course,
> nonsense. I should have been creating an index on the bid field of
> pgbench_accounts and reviewing the size of that.

Right. Because, apart from everything else, unique indexes are not
currently supported.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-04 16:27:38 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Previous Message Thom Brown 2016-02-04 16:25:55 Re: [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.