Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20021118013140.GA19069@dcc.uchile.cl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 06:43:38PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > And what about REINDEX? That seems to have a different syntax from the > > > other two. Seems there should be some consistency. > > > > We don't have a REINDEX ALL, and I'm not in a hurry to invent one. > > (Especially, I'd not want to see Alvaro spending time on that instead > > of fixing the underlying btree-compaction problem ;-)) > > My point for REINDEX was a little different. The man pages shows: > > REINDEX { DATABASE | TABLE | INDEX } <replaceable > class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [ FORCE ] > > where we don't have ALL but we do have DATABASE. Do we need that > tri-valued secodn field for reindex because you can reindex a table _or_ > and index, and hence DATABASE makes sense? I am just asking. REINDEX DATABASE is for system indexes only, it's not the same that one would think of REINDEX alone (which is all indexes on all tables, isn't it?). What I don't understand is what are the parameters in the ReindexDatabase function for. For example, the boolean all is always false in tcop/utility.c (and there are no other places that the function is called). Also, the database name is checked to be equal to a "constant" value, the database name that the standalone backend is connected to. Why are those useful? -- Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>) "No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada"
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: