Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqRriCPHew6XFNG_5i=N76B_K6pXqc5uHonNM2VtnYjCaQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
-- On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please find attached the patches wanted:> - 20130317_dump_only_valid_index.patch, a 1-line patch that makes pg_dumpDon't indisready and indislive need to be checked?
> not take a dump of invalid indexes. This patch can be backpatched to 9.0.
The patch seems to change pg_dump so that it ignores an invalid index only
when the remote server version >= 9.0. But why not when the remote server
version < 9.0?
I think that you should start new thread to get much attention about this patch
if there is no enough feedback.Yeah... Will send a message about that...
What's the conclusion of this discussion? pg_dump --binary-upgrade also should
> Note that there have been some recent discussions about that. This *problem*
> also concerned pg_upgrade.
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20121207141236.GB4699@alvh.no-ip.org
ignore an invalid index? pg_upgrade needs to be changed together?The conclusion is that pg_dump should not need to include invalid indexes if it is
to create them as valid index during restore. However I haven't seen any patch...
The fix has been done inside pg_upgrade:
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2012.html#December_14_2012
Nothing has been done for pg_dump.
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2012.html#December_14_2012
Nothing has been done for pg_dump.
Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: