On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> If you're dead set on having an escape hatch, maybe we should just get
> over it and add a way of specifying a unique index by name. As I said,
> these under-served use cases are either exceedingly rare or entirely
> theoretical.
I'm decidedly unenthusiastic about that. People don't expect CREATE
INDEX CONCURRENTLY + DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY to break their DML. I
think the solution in this case would be a gateway to problems larger
than the one we're trying to solve.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
