Jeff Davis <pgsql@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > After reading through the archives, it looks like Gregory Stark > suggested a REINDEX CONCURRENTLY, which would certainly solve the > awkwardness of maintenance on a primary key. I didn't see much > objection, maybe it's worth consideration for 8.3? That idea was bounced on the grounds that it requires a DROP INDEX to occur somewhere, and that can't be concurrent, and you'd surely not like to go through all the work of a CONCURRENTLY rebuild only to get a deadlock failure at the very end. regards, tom lane
