Re: BUG #10823: Better REINDEX syntax.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: BUG #10823: Better REINDEX syntax.
Дата
Msg-id 1840.1406742419@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #10823: Better REINDEX syntax.  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 01:29:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't find it all that odd.  We should not be encouraging routine
>> database-wide reindexes.

> Uh, do we encourage database-wide VACUUM FULL or CLUSTER, as we use them
> there with no parameter.  Is there a reason REINDEX should be harder,
> and require a dummy argument to run?

I believe that REINDEX on system catalogs carries a risk of deadlock
failures against other processes --- there was a recent example of that
in the mailing lists.  VACUUM FULL has such risks too, but that's been
pretty well deprecated for many years.  (I think CLUSTER is probably
relatively safe on this score because it's not going to think any system
catalogs are clustered.)

If there were a variant of REINDEX that only hit user tables, I'd be fine
with making that easy to invoke.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #10823: Better REINDEX syntax.
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bug fix confirmation: could not open relation with OID nnn