On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 20:07, Shayon Mukherjee <shayonj@gmail.com> wrote:
> [thinking…] Unless - we try to do support both a GUC and the ALTER INDEX ENABLE/DISABLE grammar + isdisabled
attributeon pg_index?
I just wanted to explain my point of view on this. This is my opinion
and is by no means authoritative.
I was interested in this patch when you proposed it as an ALTER INDEX
option. I know other committers seem interested, but I personally
don't have any interest in the GUC option. I think the reason I
dislike it is that it's yet another not even half-baked take on
planner hints (the other one being enable* GUCs). I often thought that
if we ever did planner hints that it would be great to have multiple
ways to specify the hints. Ordinarily, I'd expect some special comment
type as the primary method to specify hints, but equally, it would be
nice to be able to specify them in other ways. e.g. a GUC to have them
apply to more than just 1 query. Useful for things such as "don't use
index X".
Now, I'm not suggesting you go off and code up planner hints. That's a
huge project. I'm just concerned that we've already got a fair bit of
cruft that will be left remaining if we ever get core planner hints
and a disabled_indexes GUC will just add to that. I don't feel like
the ALTER INDEX method would be leftover cruft from us gaining core
planner hints. Others might feel differently on that one. I feel the
ALTER INDEX option is less controversial.
I'll also stand by what I said earlier on this thread. If PeterG gets
index skip scans done for PG18, then it's likely there's going to be
lots of users considering if they still need a certain index or not
after upgrading to PG18.
David
