Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other
Date
Msg-id 20201130215255.GA4219@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other
List pgsql-hackers
On 2020-Sep-30, Michael Paquier wrote:

> +  <para>
> +   <command>CREATE INDEX</command> (including the <literal>CONCURRENTLY</literal>
> +   option) commands are included when <command>VACUUM</command> calculates what
> +   dead tuples are safe to remove even on tables other than the one being indexed.
> +  </para>
> FWIW, this is true as well for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY because both use
> the same code paths for index builds and validation, with basically
> the same waiting phases.  But is CREATE INDEX the correct place for
> that?  Wouldn't it be better to tell about such things on the VACUUM
> doc?

Yeah, I think it might be more sensible to document this in
maintenance.sgml, as part of the paragraph that discusses removing
tuples "to save space".  But making it inline with the rest of the flow,
it seems to distract from higher-level considerations, so I suggest to
make it a footnote instead.

I'm not sure on the wording to use; what about this?


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: support IncrementalSortPath type in outNode()
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: unescape_text function