Re: Force specific index disuse

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Force specific index disuse
Date: 2014-05-20 18:55:26
Message-ID: 674.1400612126@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> writes:
> On 05/20/2014 10:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> If you can afford to lock the table for a while, the easiest is
>>
>> BEGIN;
>> DROP INDEX bothersome_idx;
>> EXPLAIN your_query;
>> ROLLBACK;

> Interesting. But what do you mean by "a while?" Does the above keep the
> index intact (brief lock) or does it have to rebuild it on rollback?

The index doesn't need to be rebuilt; the transaction need take only
as long as your EXPLAIN does.

> What would happen if you did:
> BEGIN;
> DROP INDEX bothersome_idx;
> INSERT INTO indexed_table...;
> ROLLBACK;

The INSERT would insert a tuple lacking any entry in bothersome_idx,
but it doesn't matter since it'll get rolled back.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G Johnston 2014-05-20 18:56:38 Re: Force specific index disuse
Previous Message Steve Crawford 2014-05-20 18:54:17 Re: Force specific index disuse