Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:43 PM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> And yeah, this does nothing for making sure we choose the correct
> index if more than one matching index exists on the leaf partition,
> but perhaps we can dump a series of
>
> ALTER INDEX p_a_idx REPLACE INDEX FOR p1 WITH p1_a_idx;
> ALTER INDEX p_a_idx REPLACE INDEX FOR p2 WITH p2_a_idx;
>
> ... which would be no-ops most of the time, but at least would ensure
> we use the correct index. (Likely we could fix the FOREIGN KEY
> constraint choosing the first matching index with some variation of
> this syntax)

Sure, that would fix the problem I'm concerned about, but creating the
parent index first, as a shell, and then creating each child and
attaching it to the parent *also* fixes the problem I'm concerned
about, and without dragging any bystander objects into the fray.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company