Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25447.1354899712@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > On 7 December 2012 12:37, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> - There is still a problem with toast indexes. If the concurrent reindex of >> a toast index fails for a reason or another, pg_relation will finish with >> invalid toast index entries. I am still wondering about how to clean up >> that. Any ideas? > Build another toast index, rather than reindexing the existing one, > then just use the new oid. Um, I don't think you can swap in a new toast index OID without taking exclusive lock on the parent table at some point. One sticking point is the need to update pg_class.reltoastidxid. I wonder how badly we need that field though --- could we get rid of it and treat toast-table indexes just the same as normal ones? (Whatever code is looking at the field could perhaps instead rely on RelationGetIndexList.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: