Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 10/29/2013 03:53 PM, Leonardo Francalanci wrote:
>> 5) something else???
> Quite likely nobody has had the enthusiasm and interest to implement a
> viable, quality implementation and stick with it long enough to get it
> committed.
> There are a great many good ideas for improvements to Pg that just don't
> have the people and time behind them to make them happen.
Before getting too excited about some new academic index type, it's worth
noting the sad state in which hash indexes have languished for years.
Nobody's bothered to add WAL support, let alone do any other real work
on them. The non-btree index types that have been getting love are the
ones that offer the ability to index queries that btree can't. I think
a new index type whose only benefit is the claim to be faster in a narrow
use-case is likely to end up like hash, not getting used enough to be
properly maintained.
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
