Re: 回复:how to create index concurrently on partitioned table
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 回复:how to create index concurrently on partitioned table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200812133708.GB11663@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 回复:how to create index concurrently on partitioned table (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 回复:how to create index concurrently on partitioned table
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 12:28:20AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 01:54:38PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> +++ b/src/backend/catalog/index.c >> @@ -3661,20 +3662,12 @@ reindex_relation(Oid relid, int flags, int options) >> + elog(ERROR, "unsupported relation kind for relation \"%s\"", >> + RelationGetRelationName(rel)); > > I guess it should show the relkind(%c) in the message, like these: Sure, but I don't see much the point in adding the relkind here knowing that we know which one it is. > ISTM reindex_index is missing that, too: > > 8b08f7d4820fd7a8ef6152a9dd8c6e3cb01e5f99 > + if (iRel->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX) > + elog(ERROR, "unsupported relation kind for index \"%s\"", > + RelationGetRelationName(iRel)); The error string does not follow the usual project style either, so I have updated both. >> <para> >> - Reindexing partitioned tables or partitioned indexes is not supported. >> - Each individual partition can be reindexed separately instead. >> + Reindexing partitioned indexes or partitioned tables is supported >> + with respectively <command>REINDEX INDEX</command> or >> + <command>REINDEX TABLE</command>. > > Should say "..with REINDEX INDEX or REINDEX TABLE, respectively". > >> + Each partition of the partitioned >> + relation defined is rebuilt in its own transaction. > > => Each partition of the specified partitioned relation is reindexed in a > separate transaction. Thanks, good idea. I have been able to work more on this patch today, and finally added an error context for the transaction block check, as that's cleaner. In my manual tests, I have also bumped into a case that failed with the original patch (where there were no session locks), and created an isolation test based on it: drop of a partition leaf concurrently to REINDEX done on the parent. One last thing I have spotted is that we failed to discard properly foreign tables defined as leaves of a partition tree, causing a reindex to fail, so reindex_partitions() ought to just use RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE() to do its filtering work. I am leaving this patch alone for a couple of days now, and I'll try to come back to it after and potentially commit it. The attached has been indented by the way. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: