Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Marin Dimitrov" <marin(dot)dimitrov(at)sirma(dot)bg>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2
Date: 2002-05-10 16:39:56
Message-ID: 29140.1021048796@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Marin Dimitrov" <marin(dot)dimitrov(at)sirma(dot)bg> writes:
> the idea of ALTER INDEX ...REBUILD/COALESCE is that the index is optimised
> without accessing the table, so it should be faster

If you feel a compelling need to have a variant of REINDEX that works
that way, feel free to write it. It seems like an extremely
low-priority concern to me, though. (No, I'm not convinced there's
much performance gain to be had there, either...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-05-10 17:00:56 Re: trouble with (lack of) indexing
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2002-05-10 16:12:57 Re: [why copy ? its not correct working outside static