Re: Online index builds

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> After reading through the archives, it looks like Gregory Stark
> suggested a REINDEX CONCURRENTLY, which would certainly solve the
> awkwardness of maintenance on a primary key. I didn't see much
> objection, maybe it's worth consideration for 8.3?

That idea was bounced on the grounds that it requires a DROP INDEX to
occur somewhere, and that can't be concurrent, and you'd surely not like
to go through all the work of a CONCURRENTLY rebuild only to get a
deadlock failure at the very end.

regards, tom lane