| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Maksim Milyutin <m(dot)milyutin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table |
| Date: | 2017-11-14 12:16:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f_m-PbyOZg1H9Gtu4Eb=b7yrWPO-=TJCQhpLA8_a8qqSw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 15 November 2017 at 01:09, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> if a
> partition exists which *doesn't* have the index, restoring things this
> way would create the index in that partition too, which is unwanted
> because the end state is different to what was in the dumped database.
hmm, but surely the all those indexes must already exist if the
partitioned index exists. Won't we be disallowing DROP INDEX of the
leaf partition indexes if that index is marked as being part of the
partitioned index?
If so, then surely this could only happen if someone manually edited
the pg_dump file to remove the CREATE INDEX statement for the leaf
partition, and if they do that, then maybe they won't be so surprised
that CREATE INDEX has to create some indexes.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-11-14 12:26:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-11-14 12:09:46 | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table |