| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2013-10-10 07:38:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20131010073855.GD3825719@alap2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-10-02 13:16:06 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Each patch applied with its parents compiles, has no warnings AFAIK
> and passes regression/isolation tests. Working on 0004 by the end of
> the CF seems out of the way IMO, so I'd suggest focusing on 0002 and
> 0003 now, and I can put some time to finalize them for this CF. I
> think that we should perhaps split 0003 into 2 pieces, with one patch
> for the introduction of index_concurrent_build, and another for
> index_concurrent_set_dead. Comments are welcome about that though, and
> if people agree on that I'll do it once 0002 is finalized.
FWIW I don't think splitting of index_concurrent_build is worthwile...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2013-10-10 08:01:44 | Re: Patch for fast gin cache performance improvement |
| Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2013-10-10 07:27:25 | Re: [HACKERS] Urgent Help Required |