Re: Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Sawada Masahiko
Subject Re: Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoAwzF7Zw5dFoDEMfA4jCv5Mu+C9HbGQLWs2-MDgRt3_1g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA  (Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 9 December 2014 at 17:17, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:

>> While re-looking at that. I just found that when selecting the
>> relations that are reindexed for a schema we ignore materialized view
>> as the key scan is only done using 'r' as relkind. The patch attached
>> fixes that.
> Here is an updated patch doing as well that:
> - Regression test checking if user has permissions on schema was broken
> - Silent NOTICE messages of REINDEX by having client_min_messages set
> to WARINING (thoughts about having a plpgsql function doing
> consistency checks of relfilenode before and after reindex?)

ISTM that REINDEX is not consistent with VACUUM, ANALYZE or CLUSTER in
the way it issues NOTICE messages.

I'm inclined to simply remove the NOTICE messages, except when a
REINDEX ... VERBOSE is requested.


+1 to remove the NOTICE messages except when specifying VERBOSE.

It would output a lot of messages if there are many table in schema.
If nobody objects to it, I will work on this.

Regards,

--
Sawada Masahiko 


--
Regards,

-------
Sawada Masahiko

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA
Next
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API