| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, Thomas Kellerer <shammat(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Global Unique Index |
| Date: | 2022-11-30 09:09:49 |
| Message-ID: | 922afef1-430c-e929-2589-ec3190bb11d7@postgresfriends.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/29/22 17:29, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-11-29 at 13:58 +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> I disagree. A user does not need to know that a table is partitionned,
>> and if the user wants a unique constraint on the table then making them
>> type an extra word to get it is just annoying.
>
> Hmm. But if I created a primary key without thinking too hard about it,
> only to discover later that dropping old partitions has become a problem,
> I would not be too happy either.
I have not looked at this patch, but my understanding of its design is
the "global" part of the index just makes sure to check a unique index
on each partition. I don't see from that how dropping old partitions
would be a problem.
--
Vik Fearing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jelte Fennema | 2022-11-30 09:20:42 | Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Add non-blocking version of PQcancel |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-11-30 08:53:20 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |