Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906A29FB488 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:03:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52543-10 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:03:29 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA3B39FB487 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:03:29 -0400 (AST) Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971DC8B48B; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:03:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from web2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.211]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:03:28 -0500 Received: by web2.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 77DBE115DD; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:03:28 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1169233408.21922.1170154897@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: UlBdJiiB8w2gVyJbpjeJ8OOnyAsOOYy0TA15eDJM43YN 1169233408 From: "Jeremy Haile" To: "Tom Lane" , "Ed L." Cc: "Csaba Nagy" , "Postgres general mailing list" , "Bill Moran" , "Alvaro Herrera" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface References: <20070117093223.bcdb302e.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <200701181842.00696.pgsql@bluepolka.net> <1169197877.11526.10.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de> <200701191019.52768.pgsql@bluepolka.net> <17158.1169228703@sss.pgh.pa.us> Subject: Re: Index bloat of 4x In-Reply-To: <17158.1169228703@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:03:28 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200701/1083 X-Sequence-Number: 107623 Is it feasible to add a "reindex concurrently" that doesn't lock the table for the rebuild, then locks the table when doing a second pass to pickup rows that were changed after the first pass? Or something like that.... On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 12:45:03 -0500, "Tom Lane" said: > "Ed L." writes: > > Online index creation definitely helps us toward 24x7. But > > wouldn't we still have to drop the old index, thus blocking > > production queries? > > Yes, but only for a very short period. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend