Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Claudio Freire
Subject Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
Date
Msg-id CAGTBQpYeKyfN4_qryv7O+biMPqjapLH4r4gNUOCrHgfbOAeZiQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
List pgsql-performance
Tree view 
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote:
> To make the test into i/o bound, I change the setrandom from 100000 to
> 10000000; this produced some unexpected results. The hash index is
> pulling about double the tps (~80 vs ~ 40) over the hybrid version.
> Well, unless my methodology is wrong, it's unfair to claim btree is
> beating hash in 'all cases'. hm.

Is this only selects?
Hash performs badly with updates, IIRC.
I haven't tried in a long while, though.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged since 2005: revive or bury it?
Next
From: Igor Chudov
Date:
Subject: Postgres INSERT performance and scalability