On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 00:09 -0700, Steven Schlansker wrote: > I understand that the current wisdom is "don't use hash indices", but > (unfortunately?) I have benchmarks that > show that our particular application is faster by quite a bit when a > hash index is available. Can you publish the results somewhere? It might provoke some interest. > I assume that fixing the hash index logging issue hasn't been a > priority due to low interest / technical limitations, but I'm curious > for a stopgap measure -- can we somehow configure Postgres to ignore > hash indices on a replica, using other b-tree indices or even a > sequential scan? I know I can do this on a per-connection basis by > disabling various index lookup methods, but it'd be nice if it just > ignored invalid indices on its own. This might work for you: http://sigaev.ru/git/gitweb.cgi?p=plantuner.git;a=blob;hb=HEAD;f=README.plantuner Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
