Re: ALTER tbl rewrite loses CLUSTER ON index - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: ALTER tbl rewrite loses CLUSTER ON index
Date
Msg-id 20200316142523.GA14606@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER tbl rewrite loses CLUSTER ON index  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER tbl rewrite loses CLUSTER ON index  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2020-Mar-16, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> Also, should we call it "is_index_clustered", since otherwise it sounds alot
> like "+get_index_clustered" (without "is"), which sounds like it takes a table
> and returns which index is clustered.  That might be just as useful for some of
> these callers.

Amit's proposed name seems to match lsyscache.c usual conventions better.

> Should we use your get_index_isclustered more widely ?

Yeah, in cluster(), mark_index_clustered().

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: Option to dump foreign data in pg_dump
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Online checksums verification in the backend