Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:12:22 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: Shayon Mukherjee <shayonj@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Proposal to Enable/Disable Index using ALTER INDEX
Message-ID: <ZuBh1pSlyeAnRJYp@nathan>
References: <CANqtF-oXKe0M=0QOih6H+sZRjE2BWAbkW_1+9nMEAMLxUJg5jA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvoVL57C-pWtBO_1bvzTHRvSGN3BY_5us5F9mDbKdqG=YA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAApHDvoVL57C-pWtBO_1bvzTHRvSGN3BY_5us5F9mDbKdqG=YA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZuBh1pSlyeAnRJYp%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:16:34AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> I think the primary use case here is to assist in dropping useless
> indexes in a way that can very quickly be undone if the index is more
> useful than thought. If you didn't keep the index up-to-date then that
> would make the feature useless for that purpose.
> 
> If we get the skip scan feature for PG18, then there's likely going to
> be lots of people with indexes that they might want to consider
> removing after upgrading. Maybe this is a good time to consider this
> feature as it possibly won't ever be more useful than it will be after
> we get skip scans.

+1, this is something I've wanted for some time.  There was some past
discussion, too [0].

[0] https://postgr.es/m/flat/ed8c9ed7-bb5d-aaec-065b-ad4893645deb%402ndQuadrant.com

-- 
nathan