On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > >> Also I think we need to enhance ALTER INDEX to assign new table spaces > >> for indexes. Assigning different tables spaces for tables and indexes > >> are essential to gain more I/O speed IMO. > > > I thought about this. ALTER INDEX doesn't exist yet and I figured that, > > unlike the case of tables, its easy to drop and recreate indexes in new > > tablespaces. > > The precedents we already have (ALTER OWNER, RENAME, SET STATISTICS) > are that ALTER TABLE applies to any relation type for which it makes > sense. So I'd expect ALTER TABLE SET TABLESPACE to just work on > indexes, not that we'd go and invent an ALTER INDEX ... command.
Yes, of course. > > Given that you implement the data transfer as a straight block-by-block > copy and not some kind of tuple-at-a-time thing, I would think that > it would be trivial to consider them the same case from an > implementation point of view, too. But I did implement it as a tuple at a time thing. I reused the code from rebuild_relation()... What did you have in mind? Gavin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])