On 3/19/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah, I think CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY is much easier to solve. Though
I am not completely convinced that we can do that without much changes
to CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY logic. For example, I believe we still
need to lock out HOT-updates before we start CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
Otherwise we might end up creating two paths to the same tuple in
the new index.

Say, we have a table with two columns (int a, int b). We have an
index on 'a' and building another index on 'b'. We got a tuple
(10, 20) in the heap. In the first phase of CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY,
this tuple would be indexed. If the tuple is HOT-updated to (10, 30)
before the first phase ends, the updated tuple would again get
indexed in the second phase. This would lead to two paths to the
latest visible tuple from the new index.

just a thought...can you disable HOT on the fly?  why not disable hot
updates completely during these types of operations?.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to