Re: Deprecating Hash Indexes

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Deprecating Hash Indexes
Date: 2012-10-15 17:03:35
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJ=P=Sb1ABArEz1ff6Ghu9518v2DEbX3HZCvg=QsZKR_g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 15 October 2012 15:19, Andres Freund said...

> I vote for at least logging a wal record when a hash index is modified which
> uses incomplete actions to set 'indisready = false' in case its replayed. That
> should only use a rather minor amount of code and should help users to find
> problems faster.

Good idea, though might be harder than it first appears.

How do we issue just one of those per checkpoint, to minimise WAL? How
do we make that change with a physical update WAL? Non-transactional
update? During recovery?

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-10-15 17:07:03 Re: Deprecating Hash Indexes
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-10-15 16:59:01 Re: Deprecating Hash Indexes