Re: disabling an index without deleting it?
От | Scott Marlowe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: disabling an index without deleting it? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | dcc563d10802262116q54b0541fj1aa10821e2255419@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: disabling an index without deleting it? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: disabling an index without deleting it?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Markus Bertheau" <mbertheau.pg@googlemail.com> writes: > > 2008/2/27, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > > >> No, what makes you think that? The index won't change at all in the > >> above example. The major problem is, as Scott says, that DROP INDEX > >> takes exclusive lock on the table so any other sessions will be locked > >> out of it for the duration of your test query. > > > Why is the exclusive lock not taken later, so that this method can be > > used reasonably risk-free on production systems? > > Er, later than what? Once the DROP is pending, other transactions can > hardly safely use the index for lookups, and what should they do about > insertions? I see what you're saying. Sadly, my dreams of drop index concurrently appear dashed.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: