Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org> writes:
> Also, could we enhance REINDEX to not require an exclusive table lock?
> Without looking at the code, I would think that we could at least allow
> for SELECTs (using seqscans or other indexes) while a REINDEX is running.
Not unless you see a way to prevent those SELECTs from trying to use the
index...
Personally I think putting development effort into REINDEX is a waste of
manpower. Study how to make btree collapse out empty pages, instead.
regards, tom lane