Re: doubts
От | Scott Ribe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: doubts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9493A23B-213C-4479-82FD-1AAE18127655@elevated-dev.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | doubts (Thomaz Luiz Santos <thomaz.santos@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: doubts
|
Список | pgsql-admin |
On Aug 3, 2022, at 5:06 PM, Thomaz Luiz Santos <thomaz.santos@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have one question: is it possible to minimize the downtime for this process ( because this table is large. ), using anotherstrategy, like one view and updating the view ? Yes, using a view and redefining it after the new data is loaded would work. You could also: - load new data into a new table - begin transaction - drop old table - rename new table - commit The drop/rename dance executes very quickly because it's just manipulating catalog entries--with the caveat that droppingthe table requires an exclusive lock for the obvious reason, so if you have a long-running transaction using thattable, you can wind up waiting for it. Look at the docs for CREATE TABLE and the "LIKE" option, which gives you a shortcut to creating a table with the structureof an existing one. One peculiarity you might or might not care about: when you create your indexes on the new table, they will be named basedon that table's name, and when you rename it the indexes don't get renamed. Personally, I am OK with "my_table_temp_some_idx"on "my_table", but if this offends your sensibilities, you can always rename the indexes ;-) andconstraints ;-)
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: