| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: PANIC: invalid index offnum: 186 when processing BRIN indexes in VACUUM |
| Date: | 2017-11-03 19:56:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20171103195615.beqy4vcrlnx4pujn@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think your argument is sensible for some uses (where people run manual
> VACUUM after loading data) but not others (where people just use manual
> VACUUM in place of autovacuuming -- because they don't trust autovac, or
> the schedule isn't convenient, or whatever other reason). I've seen
> both things being done in production.
BTW I also noticed that creating an index does summarize the first range
(rather than leaving it empty, as this rationale would suggest). I
think we changed this at the last minute before commit in 9.5 and never
revisited; I'm inclined to change it for pg11 (but not now, of course).
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-11-03 19:57:18 | Re: LDAPS |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-11-03 19:52:04 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |