On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 06:43:38PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > And what about REINDEX? That seems to have a different syntax from the
> > > other two. Seems there should be some consistency.
> >
> > We don't have a REINDEX ALL, and I'm not in a hurry to invent one.
> > (Especially, I'd not want to see Alvaro spending time on that instead
> > of fixing the underlying btree-compaction problem ;-))
>
> My point for REINDEX was a little different. The man pages shows:
>
> REINDEX { DATABASE | TABLE | INDEX } <replaceable
> class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [ FORCE ]
>
> where we don't have ALL but we do have DATABASE. Do we need that
> tri-valued secodn field for reindex because you can reindex a table _or_
> and index, and hence DATABASE makes sense? I am just asking.
REINDEX DATABASE is for system indexes only, it's not the same that one
would think of REINDEX alone (which is all indexes on all tables, isn't
it?).
What I don't understand is what are the parameters in the
ReindexDatabase function for. For example, the boolean all is always
false in tcop/utility.c (and there are no other places that the function
is called). Also, the database name is checked to be equal to a
"constant" value, the database name that the standalone backend is
connected to. Why are those useful?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada"
