| From: | Paul Silveira <plabrh1(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Better name/syntax for "online" index creation |
| Date: | 2006-07-26 11:21:13 |
| Message-ID: | 5501425.post@talk.nabble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I understand the negative implications with calling it "ONLINE" with regards
to the index rebuild but I believe that would follow what the industry and
professionals understand. Oracle denotes this concept as ONLINE and
microsoft with it's new SQL Server 2005 markets the ability to do "ONLINE"
reindexing. (rebuilding an index in SQL Server 2000 will cause blocking)
If I didn't know anything about PostgreSQL and read a manual about it's
indexing capabilities and read that it had ONLINE reindexing, the first
thing that I would think about was the ability to rebuild my indexes without
causing any blocking or writers or readers.
There might be a better token word to use in this situation but I don't
think that ONLINE would be out of bounds...
Just my 2 cents...
Paul Silveira
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Better-name-syntax-for-%22online%22-index-creation-tf1992993.html#a5501425
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers forum at Nabble.com.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2006-07-26 11:24:19 | Re: pgbench enhancements |
| Previous Message | Gregory S Stark | 2006-07-26 11:11:28 | Re: effective_cache_size is a real? |