On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:10 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I think vacuuming for global indexes is somewhat challenging as well :-)
> Maybe not as much as for indirect indexes, that's true.
>
> In order for it to be sustainable, I think you'll want to reuse
> partition identifiers when the partitions are dropped/detached, which
> means that you need a way to ensure that index entries to those
> partitions are removed from all indexes.
I'm not so sure about that. I see your point, but I think that you can
also make the opposite argument. That is, you can make a good case for
asynchronously cleaning up the dead entries that point to a dropped
partition (probably within VACUUM). Perhaps we should offer *both* as
options.
--
Peter Geoghegan