Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTQexR-S+=37Pae2GTTTdEXEYwUm0KKPDHyA8D_spyaHQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Please find attached an updated patch fixing the following issues:
- gin and gist indexes are now rebuilt correctly. Some option values were not passed to the concurrent indexes (reported by Masao)
- swap is done with relfilenode and not names. In consequence pg_stat_user_indexes is not reset (reported by Peter).
I am looking at the issue reported previously with make installcheck.
Regards,

On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2013-03-01 16:32:19 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> REINDEX CONCURRENTLY resets the statistics in pg_stat_user_indexes,
> whereas plain REINDEX does not.  I think they should be preserved in
> either case.

Yes. Imo this further suggests that it would be better to switch the
relfilenodes (+indisclustered) of the two indexes instead of switching
the names. That would allow to get rid of the code for moving over
dependencies as well.
Given we use an exclusive lock for the switchover phase anyway, there's
not much point in going for the name-based switch. Especially as some
eventual mvcc-correct system access would be fine with the relfilenode
method.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
 Andres Freund                     http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



--
Michael
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: LIBPQ Implementation Requiring BYTEA Data
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums