Re: Reducing relation locking overhead - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Reducing relation locking overhead
Date
Msg-id 87iru8f16v.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reducing relation locking overhead  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: Reducing relation locking overhead  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:

> Surely in the real world REINDEX is run so rarely compared to all those other
> operations it'd be a win...

It's not a question of frequency. We're not talking about something like a 10%
performance loss. You're talking about whether REINDEX is useful at all.
Consider installations where REINDEX will require shutting down business
critical operations for days...

It was a *major* new feature that many people were waiting for when Oracle
finally implemented live CREATE INDEX and REINDEX. The ability to run create
an index without blocking any operations on a table, even updates, was
absolutely critical for 24x7 operation.

-- 
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Fork-based version of pgbench
Next
From: Trent Shipley
Date:
Subject: Re: generalizing the planner knobs