| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0 |
| Date: | 2018-12-31 21:41:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20181231214133.jy5ihqq5554brk7n@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-12-31 21:35:57 +0000, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> >>>>> "Alvaro" == Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>
> Alvaro> After looking at the proposed grammar again today and in danger
> Alvaro> of repeating myself, IMO allowing the concurrency keyword to
> Alvaro> appear outside the parens would be a mistake. Valid commands:
>
> Alvaro> REINDEX (VERBOSE, CONCURRENTLY) TABLE foo;
> Alvaro> REINDEX (CONCURRENTLY) INDEX bar;
>
> We burned that bridge with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY; to make REINDEX
> require different syntax would be too inconsistent.
>
> If we didn't have all these existing uses of CONCURRENTLY without
> parens, your argument might have more merit; but we do.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-12-31 21:52:33 | Re: stats_temp_directory conflicts |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-12-31 21:41:30 | Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue |