Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: 2013-03-03 12:54:36
Message-ID: 20130303125436.GA13803@alap2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-03-01 16:32:19 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> REINDEX CONCURRENTLY resets the statistics in pg_stat_user_indexes,
> whereas plain REINDEX does not. I think they should be preserved in
> either case.

Yes. Imo this further suggests that it would be better to switch the
relfilenodes (+indisclustered) of the two indexes instead of switching
the names. That would allow to get rid of the code for moving over
dependencies as well.
Given we use an exclusive lock for the switchover phase anyway, there's
not much point in going for the name-based switch. Especially as some
eventual mvcc-correct system access would be fine with the relfilenode
method.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2013-03-03 13:12:12 Re: Materialized views WIP patch
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2013-03-03 08:48:03 Re: Materialized views WIP patch