On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Simon objected that putting the PK >> into the index tuple would disable HOT, but I don't think that's a >> valid objection. > > Just to be clear, that's not what I objected to. Claudio appeared to > be suggesting that an indirect index is the same thing as an index > with PK tacked onto the end, which I re-confirm is not the case since > doing that would not provide the primary objective of indirect > indexes.
No, I was suggesting using the storage format of those indexes. Perhaps I wasn't clear. CREATE INDEX could be implemented entirely as the rewrite I mention, I believe. But everything else can't, as you say. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
