Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:

> Surely in the real world REINDEX is run so rarely compared to all those other
> operations it'd be a win...

It's not a question of frequency. We're not talking about something like a 10%
performance loss. You're talking about whether REINDEX is useful at all.
Consider installations where REINDEX will require shutting down business
critical operations for days...

It was a *major* new feature that many people were waiting for when Oracle
finally implemented live CREATE INDEX and REINDEX. The ability to run create
an index without blocking any operations on a table, even updates, was
absolutely critical for 24x7 operation.

-- 
greg

In response to

• Re: Reducing relation locking overhead at 2005-12-02 02:45:02 from Christopher Kings-Lynne

Responses

• Re: Reducing relation locking overhead at 2005-12-02 07:14:37 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Trent Shipley	Date: 2005-12-02 07:06:28
	Subject: Re: generalizing the planner knobs
Previous:	From: Greg Stark	Date: 2005-12-02 06:40:06
	Subject: Re: Fork-based version of pgbench