Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name
Date
Msg-id CANbhV-GzM_KukbDm6qWFRfpkv==uDjXOOU-KMHqRz71ojce_rg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name  (Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 12:25, Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 at 08:00, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 03, 2022 at 05:41:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > This is marked as Ready for Committer, but that seems unduly
> > > optimistic.
> >
> > Please note that patch authors should not switch a patch as RfC by
> > themselves.  This is something that a reviewer should do.
> >
> > > The cfbot shows that it's failing on all platforms ---
> > > and not in the same way on each, suggesting there are multiple
> > > problems.
> >
> > A wild guess is that this comes from the patch that manipulates
> > get_database_name(), something that there is no need for as long as
> > the routine is called once in ReindexMultipleTables().
>
> OK, let me repost the new patch and see if CFbot likes that better.
>
> This includes Michael's other requested changes for reindexdb.

That's fixed it on the CFbot. Over to you, Michael. Thanks.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: interrupt processing during FATAL processing