Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Did we ever do anything about this?
Seems to be in there in CVS HEAD:
/*
* If we just insert the tuples into the index in scan order, then
* (assuming their hash codes are pretty random) there will be no locality
* of access to the index, and if the index is bigger than available RAM
* then we'll thrash horribly. To prevent that scenario, we can sort the
* tuples by (expected) bucket number. However, such a sort is useless
* overhead when the index does fit in RAM. We choose to sort if the
* initial index size exceeds effective_cache_size.
*
* NOTE: this test will need adjustment if a bucket is ever different
* from one page.
*/
if (num_buckets >= (uint32) effective_cache_size)
buildstate.spool = _h_spoolinit(index, num_buckets);
else
buildstate.spool = NULL;
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
