Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> BTW, if there is no proven case where hash index works significantly
> better than btree (that's what the doc says), why not just completely
> abandon it ?
That has been considered many times, see archives. I believe the changes
done in 8.4 actually made it faster for some cases. And as Kenneth
pointed out hash indexes can handle keys larger than 1/3 of page size,
that b-tree can't.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
