Kenneth Marshall <k...@rice.edu> writes: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 03:31:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hash indexes are so far from being production-grade that this argument >> is not significant.
> In addition that change from 8.3 -> 8.4 to store only the hash and not > the value in the index means that a reindex would be required in any event. Indeed, and I fully expect there will be some more on-disk format changes required before we get to the point where hash indexes are actually interesting for production. If we start insisting that they be in-place-upgradable now, we will pretty much guarantee that they never become useful enough to justify the restriction :-( (As examples, the hash bucket size probably needs revisiting, and we ought to think very hard about whether we shouldn't switch to 64-bit hash values. And that's not even considering some of the more advanced suggestions that have been made.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers