Re: [PERFORM] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL

Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:

> I'm posting mainly because I wasn't sure what to do to avoid false positives in
> the case of hash collisions. In the hash AM code it is somewhat awkward to
> fetch the pointed-to heap tuple and recheck the scankey.[1] I just did the
> first thing that came to mind -- I marked all the hash AM opclasses as "lossy",
> so the index qual is rechecked. This works, but suggestions for a better way to
> do things would be welcome.

I would have thought that would be the only way worth considering.

Consider for example a query involving two or more hash indexes and the new
bitmap indexscan plan. You don't want to fetch the tuples if you can eliminate
them using one of the other indexes.

--
greg