Re: pgsql-server/src/backend catalog/index.c comma ...

"Hiroshi Inoue" <inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
>> I committed the fixes a few minutes ago.  I now actually believe that
>> reindexing system tables works ;-) ... hopefully Hiroshi does too.

> I don't see your commit message yet.

CVS reports to the committers list seem to be wedged this afternoon :-(.
I already complained to Marc about it.  But in the meantime here is the
cvs2cl entry:

2003-09-24 14:54  tgl

    * doc/src/sgml/ref/postgres-ref.sgml,
    doc/src/sgml/ref/reindex.sgml, src/backend/access/index/genam.c,
    src/backend/access/transam/xact.c, src/backend/catalog/index.c,
    src/backend/catalog/pg_largeobject.c,
    src/backend/commands/functioncmds.c,
    src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c, src/backend/commands/vacuum.c,
    src/backend/executor/execUtils.c,
    src/backend/executor/nodeIndexscan.c,
    src/backend/storage/ipc/sinval.c, src/backend/tcop/postgres.c,
    src/backend/tcop/utility.c, src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c,
    src/backend/utils/cache/syscache.c,
    src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c, src/include/miscadmin.h,
    src/include/catalog/index.h, src/include/utils/errcodes.h,
    src/include/utils/rel.h, src/include/utils/relcache.h: Repair some
    REINDEX problems per recent discussions.  The relcache is now able
    to cope with assigning new relfilenode values to nailed-in-cache
    indexes, so they can be reindexed using the fully crash-safe
    method.  This leaves only shared system indexes as special cases.
    Remove the 'index deactivation' code, since it provides no useful
    protection in the shared- index case.  Require reindexing of shared
    indexes to be done in standalone mode, but remove other
    restrictions on REINDEX.  -P (IgnoreSystemIndexes) now prevents
    using indexes for lookups, but does not disable index updates.    It
    is therefore safe to allow from PGOPTIONS.  Upshot: reindexing
    system catalogs can be done without a standalone backend for all
    cases except shared catalogs.

It's essentially the same as what I posted two days ago, except I
thought it would be a good idea to make REINDEX TABLE take care of the
associated TOAST table too, rather than expecting users to deal with
the toast table separately.


> Is it wrong to believe I have a right to conitune the discussion ?

Not at all, but I already waited two days for your response, and I can't
put development on hold indefinitely.  For now, those changes are in,
and you are welcome to suggest further improvements at your leisure.

            regards, tom lane