Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name
Дата
Msg-id CANbhV-EmOh-XTssH5TwannC2S1VDN5zK-b+oZKs8UdyUtc2oUw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name  (Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 08:29, Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 01:02, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 02:30:32PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > I was thinking the opposite: REINDEX DATABASE with or without a database
> > > name should always process the user relations and skip system catalogs.
> > > If the user wants to do both, then they can use REINDEX SYSTEM in
> > > addition.
> > >
> > > The reason for doing it like this is that there is no way to process
> > > only user tables and skip catalogs.  So this is better for
> > > composability.
> >
> > No objections from me to keep this distinction at the end, as long as
> > the the database name in the command has no impact on the chosen
> > behavior.
>
> OK, that's clear. Will progress.

Attached patch is tested, documented and imho ready to be committed,
so I will mark it so in CFapp.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Julien Rouhaud
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Separate the attribute physical order from logical order
Следующее
От: Yura Sokolov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BufferAlloc: don't take two simultaneous locks