Re: Patch: Global Unique Index - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Kellerer
Subject Re: Patch: Global Unique Index
Date
Msg-id fa359051-7474-671b-ce36-675fe9b5622b@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch: Global Unique Index  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Patch: Global Unique Index
List pgsql-hackers
Pavel Stehule schrieb am 24.11.2022 um 07:03:
>     There are many Oracle users that find global indexes useful despite
>     their disadvantages.
>
>     I have seen this mostly when the goal was to get the benefits of
>     partition pruning at runtime which turned the full table scan (=Seq Scan)
>     on huge tables to partition scans on much smaller partitions.
>     Partition wise joins were also helpful for query performance.
>     The substantially slower drop partition performance was accepted in thos cases
>
>
>     I think it would be nice to have the option in Postgres as well.
>
>     I do agree however, that the global index should not be created automatically.
>
>     Something like CREATE GLOBAL [UNIQUE] INDEX ... would be a lot better
>
>
> Is it necessary to use special marks like GLOBAL if this index will
> be partitioned, and uniqueness will be ensured by repeated
> evaluations?
>
> Or you think so there should be really forced one relation based
> index?
>
> I can imagine a unique index on partitions without a special mark,
> that will be partitioned,  and a second variant classic index created
> over a partitioned table, that will be marked as GLOBAL.


My personal opinion is, that a global index should never be created
automatically.

The user should consciously decide on using a feature
that might have a serious impact on performance in some areas.




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: indentation in _hash_pgaddtup()