Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build
Date: 2006-08-25 15:25:43
Message-ID: 1511.1156519543@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> The problem is that what the qualifier is doing is modifying the
> operation itself, not the properties of the index to be created, like
> UNIQUE, which modifies the index.

Right, which was the same point Bruce made earlier. And really you
can't respect that difference while putting them into the same place in
the word order. So I'm starting to feel like maybe we should leave
well enough alone.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-08-25 15:30:40 Re: [GENERAL] invalid byte sequence ?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-08-25 15:21:27 Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build