| From: | Andrea Suisani <sickpig(at)opinioni(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tobias Brox <tobixen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Why we don't want hints Was: Slow count(*) again... |
| Date: | 2011-02-11 11:33:22 |
| Message-ID: | 4D551E82.7030300@opinioni.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On 02/11/2011 12:26 PM, Tobias Brox wrote:
> 2011/2/11 Vitalii Tymchyshyn<tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>> My idea as well, though it looks ugly and it would be a maintenance
>>> head-ache (upgrading the index as new transaction types are added
>>> would mean "costly" write locks on the table,
>>
>> Create new one concurrently.
>
> Concurrently? Are there any ways to add large indexes without
> blocking inserts to the table for the time it takes to create the
> index?
yep, AFAIR since 8.2
see: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/sql-createindex.html#SQL-CREATEINDEX-CONCURRENTLY
[cut]
Andrea
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nicolas Barbier | 2011-02-11 11:50:19 | Re: Sorting. When? |
| Previous Message | Tobias Brox | 2011-02-11 11:26:01 | Re: Why we don't want hints Was: Slow count(*) again... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-02-11 13:35:51 | Re: [PERFORM] pgbench to the MAXINT |
| Previous Message | Tobias Brox | 2011-02-11 11:26:01 | Re: Why we don't want hints Was: Slow count(*) again... |