Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

> Another argument that would be enough for a rejection of this patch by a

> committer is the problem of invalid toast indexes that cannot be removed up
> cleanly by an operator. As long as there is not a clean solution for
> that...

I think that part is relatively easy to fix, I wouldn't worry too
much.
The more complex part is how to get tuptoaster.c to update the
concurrently created index. That's what I worry about. Its not going
through the normal executor paths but manually updates the toast
index - which means it won't update the indisready && !indisvalid
index...