| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com, Jaime Casanova <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Disabling an index temporarily |
| Date: | 2015-12-14 04:03:22 |
| Message-ID: | 22413.1450065802@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Not to hijack the thread even further in the wrong direction, but I
> think what Corey really wants here is to stop maintaining the index at
> retail while preserving the existing definition and existing index
> data, and then to do a wholesale fix-up, like what is done in the 2nd
> half of a create index concurrently, upon re-enabling it.
Meh. Why not just drop the index? I mean, yeah, you might save a few
keystrokes when and if you ever re-enable it, but this sure seems like
a feature in search of a use-case.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-12-14 05:13:02 | Re: Making tab-complete.c easier to maintain |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2015-12-14 03:46:39 | Re: Disabling an index temporarily |