On Wed, 11 Sept 2024 at 03:12, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:16:34AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > If we get the skip scan feature for PG18, then there's likely going to
> > be lots of people with indexes that they might want to consider
> > removing after upgrading. Maybe this is a good time to consider this
> > feature as it possibly won't ever be more useful than it will be after
> > we get skip scans.
>
> +1, this is something I've wanted for some time. There was some past
> discussion, too [0].
>
> [0] https://postgr.es/m/flat/ed8c9ed7-bb5d-aaec-065b-ad4893645deb%402ndQuadrant.com
Thanks for digging that up. I'd forgotten about that. I see there was
pushback from having this last time, which is now over 6 years ago.
In the meantime, we still have nothing to make this easy for people.
I think the most important point I read in that thread is [1]. Maybe
what I mentioned in [2] is a good workaround.
Additionally, I think there will need to be syntax in CREATE INDEX for
this. Without that pg_get_indexdef() might return SQL that does not
reflect the current state of the index. MySQL seems to use "CREATE
INDEX name ON table (col) [VISIBLE|INVISIBLE]".
David
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180618215635.m5vrnxdxhxytvmcm%40alap3.anarazel.de
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f_L7y_BTGESp5Qd6BSRHXP0mj3x9O9C_U27GU478UwpBw%40mail.gmail.com
