Re: Should duplicate indexes on same column and same table be allowed?
От | Rajesh Kumar Mallah |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should duplicate indexes on same column and same table be allowed? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a97c77030612091117j40f9fdbejcdbb85e9aa354b8d@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should duplicate indexes on same column and same table be allowed? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should duplicate indexes on same column and same table
Re: Should duplicate indexes on same column and same |
Список | pgsql-admin |
On 12/9/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Rajesh Kumar Mallah" <mallah.rajesh@gmail.com> writes: > > Suppose an index get corrupted. And you need create a new index > > with exact specs and then drop the old index. Is it better to > > have a performing corrupted index or not have it at all and temporarily > > suffer some performance degradation ? > > The case that was being discussed just a day or two ago was where you > wanted to do the equivalent of REINDEX because of index bloat, not any > functional "corruption". In that case it's perfectly clear that > temporarily not having the index isn't acceptable ... especially if > it's enforcing a unique constraint. Sorry , i guess i digressed . Lemme put the question once again. psql> CREATE INDEX x on test (col1); psql> CREATE INDEX y on test (col1); What is (are) the downsides of disallowing the second index. which is *exactly* same as previous? Regds mallah. > > regards, tom lane >
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: