On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:01:31PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 03:43:18PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Attached is a patch to fix the issue. As we know that the old index
> > will have a definition and dependencies that match with the old one, I
> > think that we should just remove any dependency records on the new
> > index before moving the new set of dependencies from the old to the
> > new index. The patch includes regression tests that scan pg_depend to
> > check that everything remains consistent after REINDEX CONCURRENTLY.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> I have done more tests for this one through the day, and committed the
> patch. There is still one bug pending related to partitioned indexes
> where REINDEX CONCURRENTLY is cancelled after phase 4 (swap) has
> committed. I am still looking more into that.
Are there any bad effects of this bug on PG 12?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
