| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrey Klychkov <aaklychkov(at)mail(dot)ru>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: |
| Date: | 2020-05-28 06:59:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20200528065948.GC3460@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 08:18:43AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, but the OP is invoking this via reindexdb. Do we need to have
> anything about it on the reindexdb page?
I don't think we should have any duplication between the REINDEX and
reindexdb pages, and we have that in reindexdb:
--concurrently
Use the CONCURRENTLY option. See REINDEX for further information.
An idea would be to append to the second sentence something like
"where all the caveats of this option are explained in details"?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-05-28 07:12:53 | Re: BUG #16468: Doc: release note 13, missing GUC enable_groupingsets_hash_disk |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-05-28 06:55:59 | Re: |