From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unsplitting btree index leaf pages |
Date: | 2005-12-25 02:01:27 |
Message-ID: | 22873.1135476087@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> writes:
> Well, REINDEX is apparently a very expensive operation right now. But
> how expensive would it be to go through the entire index and perform
> the index page merge operation being discussed here, and nothing else?
> If it's fast enough, might it be worthwhile to implement just this
> alone as a separate maintenance command (e.g., VACUUM INDEX) that
> acquires the appropriate lock (AccessExclusive, I'd expect) on the
> index to prevent exactly the issues you're concerned about?
> If it's fast enough even on large tables, it would be a nice
> alternative to REINDEX, I'd think.
This would work, but it's hard to tell if it'd be worthwhile short
of actually doing an implementation and field-testing it ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Astor | 2005-12-25 04:29:08 | Happy Holidays |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-25 01:50:34 | Re: Unsplitting btree index leaf pages |