Hannu Krosing wrote: > > > But we still have to think about similar cases (index entries pointing > > > inside CITC chains), unless we plan to disallow adding indexes to > > > tables. > > > > CREATE INDEX has to undo any chains where the new indexed columns change > > in the chain, and add index entries to remove the chain. > > Yes, that would be the most straightforward solution. > > It could be better in some cases, if we could avoid adding entries to > other indexes. Maybe we can just reset some flags, so that some SITC ops > like finding tuples by the CITC index pointer still work while adding > new entries wont. > > But it will be tricky to make this work for bitmap index scans. > > So yes, index build is a slop operation anyway, so making it even a > little slower is probably not a big problem. And most CITC chains will > have only one visible row at a time, this will probably not be a big > issue.
Consider that index scans coming from different indexes have to span the same SITC. I see no clean way to avoid making all the indexes consistent, and as you said, CREATE INDEX isn't a frequent operation. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
