Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I don't recall what the problem with just swapping the names was - but
> I'm pretty sure there was one... Hm. The index relation oids are
> referred to by constraints and dependencies. That's somewhat
> solvable. But I think there was something else as well...
The reason given 2 years ago for not using relname was the fast that
the oid of the index changes, and to it be refered by some pg_depend
entries:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20121208133730.GA6422@awork2.anarazel.de
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/12742.1354977643@sss.pgh.pa.us
Regards,
-- 
Michael