Tobias Bussmann wrote: > But I could put this > snippet as a "REINDEX CONCURRENTLY" workaround into the Administrative > Snippets category of the wiki, if there are no further objections > about the way it works.
Sounds like a good idea. There are further complications: * you can't DROP indexes belonging to constraints, so this recipe doesn't work for them. One useful trick is to create the index first, then ADD CONSTRAINT USING INDEX. * For unique constraints referenced by FKs, the above doesn't work either. One thing you can do is create a second index and swap the relfilenode underneath. This is a nasty, dirty, dangerous, unsupported trick, but it can save people's neck at times. > I always have a bit of mixed feelings with these kind of string > manipulations on dynamic SQL. It may look a bit nasty, but locking tables for long periods (or being without an important index for a period) is much worse in production scenarios. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
