On 2024-09-27 18:37:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Peter J. Holzer" writes:
> > As you can see, adding the primary key takes just as much time as
> > creating the unique index. So it doesn't look like PostgreSQL is able to
> > take advantage of the existing index (which makes sense since it still
>
"Peter J. Holzer" writes:
> As you can see, adding the primary key takes just as much time as
> creating the unique index. So it doesn't look like PostgreSQL is able to
> take advantage of the existing index (which makes sense since it still
> has to create a new index).
No, but you can attach an
On 2024-09-27 07:26:45 +0530, Aditya Singh wrote:
> we plan to migrate from the int4 ID column to an int8 ID column.
>
> The plan involves renaming the int8 column to the id column and setting it as
> the primary key. However, this process will require downtime, which may be
> substantial in a pro
Hi,
Your approach to migrating the ID column from int4 to int8 with minimal
downtime is generally sound but in my option, consider the following also:
- Consider using PostgreSQL's CONCURRENTLY option when creating the
unique index to avoid locking the entire table
- Make sure to first
