Effectively, my idea is not to chill/break the HOT chains during index creation, but rather to abandon them and wait for VACUUM to clean them up.
My idea is much closer to the idea of a bit per index on every tuple, except the tuple xmax and pg_index xid replace them. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Momjian wrote: > Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > On 3/21/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I am worried that will require CREATE INDEX to wait for a long time. > > > > > > > > Not unless there are long running transactions. We are not waiting > > for the lock, but only for the current transactions to finish. > > Waiting for all transactions might take a while, no? > > > > Is the pg_index xid idea too complex? It seems to give you the > > > per-tuple index bit, without the restrictions. > > > > > > > > How do we handle HEAP_ONLY tuple cleanup ? If I understood > > the proposal correctly, at the end of the create index, a HEAP_ONLY > > tuple may have pointer from the new index, isn't it ? > > Right. You would need vacuum to clean up the HEAP_ONLY tuples. I just > sent an email about those deails. We might have autovacuum check > pg_index and do it automatically. > > -- > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com > > + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
