| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Problem Observed in behavior of Create Index Concurrently and Hot Update |
| Date: | 2012-11-27 17:55:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20121127175509.GB22677@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2012-11-27 12:50:36 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I vote for introducing wrapper functions/macro to do the
> > about-to-be-dropped check, its hard enough to understand as-is.
>
> Meh. If it's only going to be done in RelationGetIndexList, I'm
> not sure that a wrapper macro is worth the trouble. If we needed
> the test in multiple places I'd agree, but what other spots do you
> see?
I don't really see any other querying locations - but such a macro would
make the code easier backpatchable when we introduce a third column for
the about-to-be-dropped case.
Anyway, don't feel all too strongly about it.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-11-27 18:08:12 | PITR potentially broken in 9.2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-11-27 17:50:36 | Re: Problem Observed in behavior of Create Index Concurrently and Hot Update |