Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> �Namely, that when reindexing an
>> existing index, there cannot be any need to advance the index's
>> indcheckxmin horizon.
> Note that if isvalid is not set then we don't know anything about the
> hot chains since the concurrent index build never finished.
Hmm, good point. We can probably handle this by tweaking the logic in
reindex_index that changes indisvalid so that it will force indcheckxmin
on when indisvalid had been false and there were any possibly-broken
HOT chains.
regards, tom lane
