| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Shayon Mukherjee <shayonj(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal to Enable/Disable Index using ALTER INDEX |
| Date: | 2024-09-10 15:12:22 |
| Message-ID: | ZuBh1pSlyeAnRJYp@nathan |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:16:34AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> I think the primary use case here is to assist in dropping useless
> indexes in a way that can very quickly be undone if the index is more
> useful than thought. If you didn't keep the index up-to-date then that
> would make the feature useless for that purpose.
>
> If we get the skip scan feature for PG18, then there's likely going to
> be lots of people with indexes that they might want to consider
> removing after upgrading. Maybe this is a good time to consider this
> feature as it possibly won't ever be more useful than it will be after
> we get skip scans.
+1, this is something I've wanted for some time. There was some past
discussion, too [0].
[0] https://postgr.es/m/flat/ed8c9ed7-bb5d-aaec-065b-ad4893645deb%402ndQuadrant.com
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2024-09-10 15:16:32 | Re: [PATCH] Fix small overread during SASLprep |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-10 15:06:46 | Re: Speeding up ruleutils' name de-duplication code, redux |