From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Manuel Rigger <rigger(dot)manuel(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails |
Date: | 2019-11-13 15:59:08 |
Message-ID: | 12383.1573660748@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-11-13 15:29:53 +0100, Manuel Rigger wrote:
>> On the latest trunk version, I get an error "index "t0_pkey_ccnew"
>> already contains data" when using REINDEX CONCURRENTLY:
>>
>> CREATE TEMP TABLE t0(c1 INT PRIMARY KEY) ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS;
>> REINDEX TABLE CONCURRENTLY t0; -- unexpected: ERROR: index
>> "t0_pkey_ccnew" already contains data
> It think we really ought to just refuse CIC (and thereby REINDEX
> CONCURRENTLY) for ON COMMIT DELETE/DROP temp tables. Given that CIC
> internally uses transactions, it makes no sense to use CIC on such a
> table.
It's not real clear why there would be any point in (RE)INDEX
CONCURRENTLY on a temp table anyway, since no other session could
be using it. +1 for just erroring out, rather than working
hard to support such a case.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Manuel Rigger | 2019-11-13 16:01:56 | Unexpected "cache lookup failed for collation 0" failure |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-11-13 15:48:37 | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY unexpectedly fails |