"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> ISTM that the run-another-transaction-afterwards idea is the only one
> that does everything I think we need. I really do wish we could put in a
> wait, like CIC, but I just think it will break existing programs.
Actually, there's a showstopper objection to that: plain CREATE INDEX
has to be able to run within a larger transaction. (To do otherwise
breaks "pg_dump --single-transaction", just for starters.) This means
it can *not* commit partway through.
Back to the drawing board :-(
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Florian G. Pflug||Date: 2007-03-29 21:48:34|
|Subject: Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design|
|Previous:||From: Carlos Chacon||Date: 2007-03-29 21:23:01|
|Subject: timing in PostgreSQL|