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+Tgmobf1bn017TN2R67Y+PcNEzX2OuQ5074HmN1-c=nQqMtXg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> Tangentially: I didn't like very much that I added a new index to
> pg_index to support this feature.  I thought maybe it'd be better to
> change the index on indrelid to be on (indrelid,indparentidx) instead,
> but that doesn't seem great either because it bloats that index which is
> used to support common relcache operations ...
>
> (The more I think of this, the more I believe that pg_inherits is a
> better answer.  Opinions?)

I actually haven't looked at the code, but the idea that pg_inherits
is on the way out is news to me.  If that method will work, I don't
quite see why we should invent something new.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: unique indexes on partitioned tables
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table