Re: USING HASH considered harmful?
От
Stephen Robert Norris
Тема
Re: USING HASH considered harmful?
Дата
Msg-id
20010817124528.E28987@ws12.commsecure.com.au
Ответ на
Re: USING HASH considered harmful? (Bruce Momjian)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
USING HASH considered harmful? Stephen Robert Norris <srn@commsecure.com.au>
Re: USING HASH considered harmful? Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: USING HASH considered harmful? Stephen Robert Norris <srn@commsecure.com.au>
Re: USING HASH considered harmful? Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: USING HASH considered harmful? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 09:59:02PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE > -- Start of PGP signed section. > > We've just discovered a rather nasty feature of hashes, namely that > > simultaneous reads & writes to a single row will deadlock if there > > is a hash index on the table. > > > > I guess this is because PG really has to lock the hash table entry in > > both cases. It does, however, make HASH indices completely useless for > > any table that you might want to update. > > > > Is this a known feature? > > Yes, I have heard about this problem. Would you test btree vs hash and > report back which is faster. I have requested this from >20 people and > no one reported back. I changed to hash because it was marginally faster for the queries we were doing - maybe 5% or so. It was very marginal, but we need every bit of performance we can get. Stephen
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления