Re: does reindex need exclusive table access? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Vincent de Phily
Subject Re: does reindex need exclusive table access?
Date
Msg-id 9804850.BUHEhE4VcT@moltowork
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: does reindex need exclusive table access?  (Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>)
Responses Re: does reindex need exclusive table access?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On Tuesday 01 November 2011 12:00:33 Craig Ringer wrote:
> A workaround for reindexing while live is to begin a transaction, create
> the new index with a new name, drop the old one, rename the new one to
> the old one, and commit. This only requires an exclusive lock for the
> period of the drop and rename. On more recent versions you can even use
> this for indexes that implement primary key or unique constrants by
> using the 'ADD CONSTRAINT ... USING INDEX ...' syntax; see:
>
>   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-altertable.html

Been happily doing this (without worrying about transactions, as Tom
suggested), but couldn't quite figure out how to do it with my primary key
indexes on 8.3. Do I have to bite the bullet and take an exclusive lock (or
upgrade to 9.1) ?

The technique kinda works (with some changes) using unique indexes however. Is
there a functional difference between a unique index and a primary key index
(knowing that my column is not null) ? Or is it just for documentation and ORM
purposes ?


--
Vincent de Phily

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: select where not exists returning multiple rows?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: does reindex need exclusive table access?