On 2012-11-28 14:09:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2012-11-27 23:46:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Attached is a very preliminary draft patch for this. I've not addressed
> >> the question of whether we can clear indcheckxmin during transactional
> >> updates of pg_index rows, but I think it covers everything else talked
> >> about in this thread.
> > - I noticed while trying my old isolationtester test that
> > heap_update_inplace disregards any locks on the tuple. I don't really
> > see a scenario where this is problematic right now, seems a bit
> > dangerous for the future though.
>
> I think this should be all right --- we have at least
> ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on the table and the index before we do
> anything, so nobody else should be fooling with its pg_index entry.
>
> Attached is an updated patch for HEAD that I think is about ready to go.
> I'll start making a back-patchable version shortly.
Looks good!
One minor thing I haven't noticed earlier: Perhaps we should also skip
over invalid indexes in transformTableLikeClause's
CREATE_TABLE_LIKE_INDEXES case?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services