Sorry for the lateness of this...
On 11/14/13, 8:40 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> + /*
> + * Phase 4 of REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
> + *
> + * Now that the concurrent indexes have been validated could be used,
> + * we need to swap each concurrent index with its corresponding old index.
> + * Note that the concurrent index used for swaping is not marked as valid
> + * because we need to keep the former index and the concurrent index with
> + * a different valid status to avoid an implosion in the number of indexes
> + * a parent relation could have if this operation fails multiple times in
> + * a row due to a reason or another. Note that we already know thanks to
> + * validation step that
> + */
> +
Was there supposed to be more to that comment?
In the loop right below it...
+ /* Swap the indexes and mark the indexes that have the old data as invalid */
+ forboth(lc, indexIds, lc2, concurrentIndexIds)
...
+ CacheInvalidateRelcacheByRelid(relOid);
Do we actually need to invalidate the cache on each case? Is it because we're grabbing a new transaction each time
through?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
