From: | PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | chaodhib(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | the doc should mention one particular aspect of partial indexes |
Date: | 2021-01-18 17:07:42 |
Message-ID: | 161098966261.468.431083803607667410@wrigleys.postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/sql-vacuum.html
Description:
Hi,
I think the documentation should mention one particular aspect of b-tree
partial indexes:
Say we have a row that satisfy a partial index's predicate. That row will be
referenced by the partial index. Say now that this row gets updated in such
a way that the updated row no longer satisfies the predicate. The entry of
that row in the index (more precisely, the row previous version) is still
kept in a leaf node of the b-tree until a VACUUM is issued on the index's
table.
So in short, an update on the index's predicate column results in no direct
change on the index whereas a change on an index column is reflected as soon
as the change has been committed. I think the documentation should mention
this specificity in some way since it can have impact in terms of index
design. I couldn't find a mention of this behavior anywhere in the doc.
Kind regards,
Chaouki Dhib
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-18 20:39:02 | Re: the doc should mention one particular aspect of partial indexes |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2021-01-18 14:13:22 | Re: Additional Chapter for Tutorial - arch-dev.sgml |