| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |
| Date: | 2007-03-21 17:45:20 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0703211045r3120cd62u19bcc02552326a1b@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/21/07, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 3/21/07, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > It seems much simpler to me do something like this. But important
> > question is whether the restriction that CREATE INDEX can not
> > be run in a transaction block is acceptable ?
>
> yikes -- this is huge, huge price to pay, IMHO. Think about DDL that
> implies index creation such as adding unique constraint to a table,
> many postgresql users (including me) take advantage of that in update
> systems to production databases.
>
>
I didn't understand that quite well. How does it help to run CREATE
INDEX inside a transaction ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-21 17:46:12 | Re: Effects of GUC settings on automatic replans |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2007-03-21 17:41:06 | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |