> 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
Aren't hash indexes in a poor state because they are not faster than btree in every condition? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
