Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?
Date: 2012-01-16 19:06:18
Message-ID: 1326740778.29466.10.camel@vanquo.pezone.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On mån, 2012-01-16 at 11:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't see how setting indisvalid to false helps with this, because
> IIUC when a session sees indisvalid = false, it is supposed to avoid
> using the index for queries but still make new index entries when a
> write operation happens - but to drop an index, I think you'd need to
> get into a state where no one was using the index for anything at all.

ISTM that one would need to set indisready to false instead.



In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2012-01-16 19:17:42
Subject: Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2012-01-16 18:52:35
Subject: Re: pg_basebackup option for handling symlinks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group