Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZeiJ7oh3O4kQ9aS2ti5c=90tyHO98TKtujWcjBGa4wzg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure why this feature of automatically picking up matching
> indexes even exists.  Is it for some specific workflows or upgrade
> scenarios?  It's kind of a surprising feature in a way.

It allows you to avoid building a new indexes unnecessarily when
attaching a partition.

> The catalog representations of partitioned tables and partitioned
> indexes are completely different, which may or may not be desirable.

How so?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add parallel-aware hash joins.
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add parallel-aware hash joins.