Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > HM, what if you junked the current hash indexam, and just implemented > a wrapper over btree so that the 'hash index' was just short hand for > hashing the value into a standard index? Surely creating such a wrapper would be *more* work than adding WAL support to the hash AM. I'm not entirely following this eagerness to junk that AM, anyway. We've put a lot of sweat into it over the years, in the hopes that it would eventually be good for something. It's on the edge of being good for something now, and there's doubtless room for more improvements, so why are the knives out? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
