Re: Revisiting {CREATE INDEX, REINDEX} CONCURRENTLY improvements

From: Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin86(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Revisiting {CREATE INDEX, REINDEX} CONCURRENTLY improvements
Date: 2024-06-11 08:58:05
Message-ID: CANtu0ogBOtd9ravu1CUbuZWgq6qvn1rny38PGKDPk9zzQPH8_A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello.

I did the POC (1) of the method described in the previous email, and it
looks promising.

It doesn't block the VACUUM, indexes are built about 30% faster (22 mins vs
15 mins). Additional index is lightweight and does not produce any WAL.

I'll continue the more stress testing for a while. Also, I need to
restructure the commits (my path was no direct) into some meaningful and
reviewable patches.

[1]
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/compare/master...michail-nikolaev:postgres:new_index_concurrently_approach

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiro Ikeda 2024-06-11 09:06:11 Doc: fix a description regarding WAL summarizer on glossary page
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2024-06-11 08:57:28 Re: 001_rep_changes.pl fails due to publisher stuck on shutdown