| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in reindexdb's error reporting |
| Date: | 2019-05-11 04:04:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20190511040450.GB2274@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:25:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> > The refactoring bits are fine for HEAD. For back-branches I would
> > suggest using the simplest patch of upthread.
>
> Makes sense to me too. The refactoring is mostly to make future
> additions easier, so there's not much point for back branches.
For now, I have committed and back-patched all the way down the bug
fix. The refactoring is also kind of nice so I'll be happy to look at
an updated patch. At the same time, let's get rid of
reindex_system_catalogs() and integrate it with reindex_one_database()
with a REINDEX_SYSTEM option in the enum. Julien, could you send a
new version?
> Right. Also, I was imagining folding the steps together while
> building the commands so that there's just one switch() for that,
> along the lines of
Yes, that makes sense.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2019-05-11 08:28:43 | Re: Bug in reindexdb's error reporting |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-05-11 02:31:21 | Re: pg12 release notes |