Re: Proposal: global index

From: Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)adjust(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Ildar Musin <i(dot)musin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Proposal: global index
Date: 2017-08-24 17:52:17
Message-ID: CAMjNa7d5W6SQ=2w1ghH5bwtWj5n38WH-Yvu_rYa45sKgc+QByA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

My understanding is that global indexes allow foreign keys to work
naturally with partitioned tables, or tables in an inheritance hierarchy.
That is pretty big IMO, as it allows you to partition a table without
making a trade-off in your database integrity.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-08-24 17:54:32 More replication race conditions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-08-24 17:41:59 Re: [PATCH] Push limit to sort through a subquery