| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2012-12-08 15:14:17 |
| Message-ID: | 13414.1354979657@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> The issue I raised above is just about keeping the pg_depend entries
> pointing to something valid... And not changing the indexes pg_class.oid
> seems to be the easiest solution for that.
Yeah, we would have to update pg_depend, pg_constraint, maybe some other
places if we go with that. I think that would be safe because we'd be
holding ShareRowExclusive lock on the parent table throughout, so nobody
else should be doing anything that's critically dependent on seeing such
rows. But it'd be a lot of ugly code, for sure.
Maybe the best way is to admit that we need a short-term exclusive lock
for the swapping step. Or we could wait for MVCC catalog access ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2012-12-08 15:15:42 | Re: Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2012-12-08 15:12:24 | Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree |