Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean
Date
Msg-id CAOBaU_Z__25nDzxx20kg0BEOP2XLKKQdNy3CtRw3euUKnz_q4g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 1:03 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> $subject has been mentioned a couple of times, including today:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200902010012.GE1489@paquier.xyz
>
> We have a boolean argument in ReindexStmt to control a concurrent
> run, and we also have in parallel of that a bitmask to control the
> options of the statement, which feels like a duplicate.  Attached is a
> patch to refactor the whole, adding CONCURRENTLY as a member of the
> available options.  This simplifies a bit the code.
>
> Any thoughts?


+1

 struct ReindexIndexCallbackState
 {
- bool concurrent; /* flag from statement */
+ bool options; /* flag from statement */
  Oid locked_table_oid; /* tracks previously locked table */
 };

Shouldn't options be an int?  The rest of the patch looks good to me.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean
Next
From: "Andrey M. Borodin"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Covering SPGiST index