Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Teodor Sigaev wrote:
>> - Falling back to regular insert will take long time for update of whole 
>> table - and that was one of reasons of that patch. Users forget to drop 
>> GIN index before a global update and query runs forever.

> If *that* is a use case we're interested in, the incoming tuples could 
> be accumulated in backend-private memory, and inserted into the index at 
> commit. That would be a lot simpler, with no need to worry about 
> concurrent inserts or vacuums.

Doesn't work --- the index would yield wrong answers for later queries
in the same transaction.
        regards, tom lane