Re: Hash Indexes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: Hash Indexes
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1wZs-9VsLhGZ6MKn3CM1eZ7Wm8n3NbST6R27+8dBZ7LLg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Hash Indexes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Hash Indexes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it is possible without breaking pg_upgrade, if we match all
> items of a page at once (and save them as local copy), rather than
> matching item-by-item as we do now.  We are already doing similar for
> btree, refer explanation of BTScanPosItem and BTScanPosData in
> nbtree.h.

If ever we want to sort hash buckets by TID, it would be best to do
that in v10 since we're presumably going to be recommending a REINDEX
anyway. 

We are?  I thought we were trying to preserve on-disk compatibility so that we didn't have to rebuild the indexes.

Is the concern that lack of WAL logging has generated some subtle unrecognized on disk corruption?

If I were using hash indexes on a production system and I experienced a crash, I would surely reindex immediately after the crash, not wait until the next pg_upgrade.

 
But is that a good thing to do?  That's a little harder to
say.

How could we go about deciding that?  Do you think anything short of coding it up and seeing how it works would suffice?  I agree that if we want to do it, v10 is the time.  But we have about 6 months yet on that.
 
Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Dave Cramer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PL/Python adding support for multi-dimensional arrays
Следующее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: patch: function xmltable