Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZXmKOCe5FezHF3n-KLk56Ea-N0DW6zYGGWDCz2jDXzNw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0  (Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I agree that'd it be nicer not to have this, but not having the feature at all is a lot worse than this wart.

I, again, give that a firm "maybe".  If the warts end up annoying 1%
of the users who try to use this feature, then you're right.  If they
end up making a substantial percentage of people who try to use this
feature give up on it, then we've added a bunch of complexity and
future code maintenance for little real gain.  I'm not ruling out the
possibility that you're 100% correct, but I'm not nearly as convinced
of that as you are.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Measuring replay lag
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Faster methods for getting SPI results