On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:10 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
