On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> But to kick the hash AM as such to the curb is to say >> "sorry, there will never be O(1) index lookups in Postgres". > > Well there's plenty of halfway solutions for that. We could move hash > indexes to contrib or even have them in core as experimental_hash or > unlogged_hash until the day they achieve their potential. > > We definitely shouldn't discourage people from working on hash indexes >
Okay, but to me it appears that naming it as experimental_hash or moving it to contrib could discourage people or at the very least people will be less motivated. Thinking on those lines a year or so back would have been a wise direction, but now when already there is lot of work done (patches to make it wal-enabled, more concurrent and performant, page inspect module are available) for hash indexes and still more is in progress, that sounds like a step backward then step forward. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
