| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Press Release Draft - 2016-02-09 Cumulative Update |
| Date: | 2017-02-07 23:40:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20170207234003.67rpuqda4gorso44@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
> > On Feb 7, 2017, at 4:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for the clarification. I have updated the recipe along with Emre’s comments here:
> >>
> >> [updated text not included in the email]
> >
> > I still don't think the recipe is a very good one because it leaves you
> > with a window where the affected columns are not indexed at all.
>
> Okay, so I propose two options:
>
> 1. Does anyone have a recipe they recommend that might be better? OR
Do the CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY first, then DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY the
old index, then rename the new index to the old name.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-02-07 23:57:51 | Re: Caching index AM working data across aminsert calls |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-02-07 23:04:40 | Caching index AM working data across aminsert calls |