Re: B+ versus hash maps - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: B+ versus hash maps
Date
Msg-id 3A3631F2-86C9-43D5-BBC1-9D2E797B8CA6@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to B+ versus hash maps  ("surabhi.ahuja" <surabhi.ahuja@iiitb.ac.in>)
List pgsql-general
On Jun 15, 2006, at 8:07 AM, surabhi.ahuja wrote:

> is there any way of specifying wht type of index i want, say hash
> maps instead of the B+ trees.
> someone told me that in the case where duplicates occur(on the
> indexed field), hash map are better than B+ trees.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/sql-createindex.html

> and also please tell if i can assume that it will use index only
> and not go for sequential scan,
> again i was told for that i ll have to set the random page cost
> parameter to 1.

The database will use whatever it thinks is optimal. Use explain
analyze to see what it's doing.

Unless your database fits (and stays) entirely in memory, you'll
probably be pretty unhappy with random_page_cost=1.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Shoaib Mir"
Date:
Subject: Re: query optimizer
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Annoying "could not find a "psql" to execute" message