Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> * Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> [010308 17:07] wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > btw, REINDEX essentially does the same thing as the above,
> >
> > Yes REINDEX is safe under postmaster in 7.1.
> > In addtion REINDEX has some advantages.
> > 1) no necessity to scatter the index definition.
> > 2) it doesn't change any reference among system objects.
> >
> > > but there's
> > > a lot of strange additional locking code in it,which I don't trust
> > > much... call it a design disagreement with Hiroshi ;-)
> > >
> >
> > Is it LockClassForUpdate() ? If so it's never a special function.
> > It's only implementing a 'FOR UPDATE' part of 'SELECT .. FROM PG_CLASS'
> > and 'select .. for update' before 'update ..' is an oridinary
> > sequence of update operations.
>
> Is there a way to do this under 7.0.3?
>
REINDEX for user tables is available in 7.0.3 but it isn't
safe because it must overwrite the existent index files.
Regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
