On 22 March 2014 16:28, Jim Nasby <j...@nasby.net> wrote: > On 3/21/14, 7:59 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: >> >> On 03/22/2014 01:43 AM, Thom Brown wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've created a table with 1000 partial indexes. Each one matches >>> exactly one row based on the predicate WHERE id = <value>. >>> >>> However, when I perform an UPDATE of a single row in a transaction, >>> I've noticed that all those partial indexes show up in pg_locks with >>> RowExclusiveLock. >>> >>> Only 2 of those indexes have a reference to the row: the primary key >>> and a single partial index. >>> >>> Is it necessary for a partial index that doesn't include the row to be >>> involved in locking? >> >> >> What if the update puts the row into one of the other indexes? > > > Also, why are you doing this in the first place? I'm guessing you measured > some non-trivial performance improvement from doing this; could you share > that with us?
Heh, no. I was just experimenting with various things, and also trying to break stuff. -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
