Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, 李杰(慎追) <adger(dot)lj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing(dot)zwj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>
Subject: Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index
Date: 2021-07-21 00:27:02
Message-ID: 202107210027.vfv6wn3hvfer@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I have to wonder if there really *is* a use case for CLUSTER in the
first place on regular tables, let alone on partitioned tables, which
are likely to be large and thus take a lot of time. What justifies
spending so much time on this implementation? My impression is that
CLUSTER is pretty much a fringe command nowadays, because of the access
exclusive lock required.

Does anybody actually use it?

--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Ninguna manada de bestias tiene una voz tan horrible como la humana" (Orual)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2021-07-21 00:28:09 Re: Micro-optimizations to avoid some strlen calls.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-07-21 00:14:17 Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication