Re: Bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqTRciw3gcaE4FUn96_C7PfKrC3+XpYH+fB+q_0Saqs-5Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:43 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Michael PaquierOn 2012-11-29 11:53:50 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:Looks good me.
> And here is a version for 9.1. This omits the code changes directly
> relevant to DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY, but includes the changes to avoid
> transactional updates of the pg_index row during CREATE CONCURRENTLY,
> as well as the changes to prevent use of not-valid or not-ready indexes
> in places where it matters. I also chose to keep on using the
> IndexIsValid and IndexIsReady macros, so as to avoid unnecessary
> divergences of the branches.Looks like that to me, yes.
> I think this much of the patch needs to go into all supported branches.
Thanks for all that work!
Thanks. Just by looking at the patch it will be necessary to realign the patch of REINDEX CONCURRENTLY.
However, as the discussion regarding the lock taken at phase 2 (index swapping) is still not done, I am not sure if it is worth to do that yet. Andres, please let me know in case you want a better version for your review.
--
However, as the discussion regarding the lock taken at phase 2 (index swapping) is still not done, I am not sure if it is worth to do that yet. Andres, please let me know in case you want a better version for your review.
--
http://michael.otacoo.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: