Re: CREATE INDEX ... ONLINE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CREATE INDEX ... ONLINE
Date: 2006-08-17 13:14:57
Message-ID: 5379.1155820497@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Just remembered one open question I had. I'm not clear what to do with the
> index statistics. It may be that the current code is basically the right thing
> -- it leaves the statistics as they are after phase 1, ie after the regular
> index build before we go through looking for newly added tuples.

We could update them, but if there's really all that much change then
this command is going to suck pretty badly anyway :-(.

Given the current planner behavior (get actual relation length and
multiply by reltuples/relpages to estimate tuple count), the original
reltuples and relpages are probably good enough anyhow. A big change
in index density during phase 2 seems even less likely.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2006-08-17 13:18:36 Re: Adjust autovacuum naptime automatically
Previous Message Volkan YAZICI 2006-08-17 13:13:25 Re: "cache reference leak" and "problem in alloc set" warnings

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2006-08-17 13:18:36 Re: Adjust autovacuum naptime automatically
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-17 12:54:00 Re: [PATCHES] WIP: bitmap indexes