On Wed, 11 Sept 2024 at 03:12, Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@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
