Re: The Contrib Roundup (long)

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, kar(at)kakidata(dot)dk, andrew(at)supernews(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The Contrib Roundup (long)
Date: 2005-06-12 20:52:30
Message-ID: 20050612175126.J90456@ganymede.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Tom Lane wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
>>> I consider this a bug, or at least a badly thought out name. I can't
>>> understand that someone approved 'reindex database' to mean 'reindex the
>>> system tables of a database'.
>
>> Agreed.
>
> It's always bothered me too. How about
>
> REINDEX SYSTEM -> system tables (current meaning of R. DATABASE)
> REINDEX USER -> all non-system tables
> REINDEX DATABASE -> both of the above

Why all the choices? What cases are there for doing one without the
other? If you want to get 'fine tuned', do a 'REINDEX TABLE' ... I can
see REINDEX SYSTEM and REINDEX DATABASE (includes SYSTEM), but not the
USER one ..

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-06-12 21:27:52 Re: The Contrib Roundup (long)
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-06-12 20:22:42 min/max (was: The Contrib Roundup)