>> Hash indexes have been improved since 2005 - their performance was >> improved quite a bit in 9.0. Here's a more recent analysis: > >> http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/06/28/should-you-use-hash-index/ > > The big picture though is that we're not going to remove hash indexes, > even if they're nearly useless in themselves Well, if they provide 3x the performance of btree indexes on index creation, I wouldn't call them "useless" just because they're not logged or they can't be unique. In fact, I think the docs should specify that in index creation they're actually better than btree (if, in fact, they are and the "depesz" test is not a corner case). -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
