On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:13:33PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 13:29 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote: > > I am looking at adding unique support to hash indexes for 8.5 and > > they will definitely need to visit the heap. > > Have you seen this patch? > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1246840119.19547.126.ca...@jdavis > > This patch will support unique constraints for hash indexes as well. > There may still be a use-case for specialized hash index unique > constraints, similar to btree, but please follow the work to make sure > that no work is wasted. > > Also, I don't see a problem with using the same hacks in the hash index > code as is used in the btree index code. If you see a better way, or if > you think index AM changes would be useful to you as well, you should > probably open that discussion. > > I was trying to provide an alternative to an index AM API change, > because I thought there might be some resistance to that. However, if > there are multiple index AMs that can make use of it, there is a > stronger case for an API change. > > Regards, > Jeff Davis >
I will take a look at that patch. My thought was to use the same process as the btree support for unique indexes since it has been well tested and optimized. Thanks, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers