Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails
Date
Msg-id 20191213024733.GC1942@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 05:11:08PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I liked Andres' original naming suggestion better FWIW.  With this, one
> wonders "concurrently what?"

I did not like the "creation" part from the original suggestion :)
IndexCreationSupportsConcurrent() called from a place where an index
is dropped does not sound very consistent.

> Some suggestions,
> "RelationSupportsConcurrentIndexing" or
> "IndexSupportsConcurrently".  Maybe replace the "ing" in the first or
> "ly" in the second with "DDL" or "Ops".  (Also, if it's just about
> indexes and appears in index.h, why did you use the prefix "Relation"?)

RelationSupportsConcurrentIndexing sounds like a good compromise to
me.  The reasoning behind using relation is that this check can be
used for an index or its parent relation.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #16162: create index using gist_trgm_ops leads to panic
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails