Re: hash index improving v3

Can we consider this hash thread closed/completed?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[email protected]> writes:
> > Thinks: Why not just sort all of the time and skip the debate entirely?
> 
> The sort is demonstrably a loser for smaller indexes.  Admittedly,
> if the index is small then the sort can't cost all that much, but if
> the (correct) threshold is some large fraction of shared_buffers then
> it could still take awhile on installations with lots-o-buffers.
> 
> The other side of that coin is that it's not clear this is really worth
> arguing about, much less exposing a separate parameter for.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list ([email protected])
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email protected]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

-- 
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches