On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:59:52AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> REINDEX CONCURRENTLY is by design wanted to provide an experience
> transparent to the user similar to what a plain REINDEX would do, at
> least that's the idea behind it, so.. This qualifies as a bug to me,
> in spirit.
And in spirit, it is possible to address this issue with the patch
attached which copies the set of stats from the old to the new index.
For a non-concurrent REINDEX, this does not happen because we keep the
same base relation, while we replace completely the relation with a
concurrent operation. We have a RemoveStatistics() in heap.c, but I
did not really see the point to invent a copy flavor for this
particular case. Perhaps others have an opinion on that?
--
Michael
