| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Release note updates. |
| Date: | 2017-02-07 14:17:25 |
| Message-ID: | 27218.1486477045@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Release note updates.
> Sorry for not noticing earlier, but there is a bug in the notes:
Mmm, right.
> May I suggest
> + If <command>CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY</> was used to build an index
> + that depends on a column not previously indexed, then rows
> + updated by transactions that ran concurrently with
> + the <command>CREATE INDEX</> command could have missed receiving
> + index entries.
Can we say "pre-existing rows that were updated by...", or is that
too optimistic?
(I fear this is too late for the current set of releases; I don't want
to make the packagers redo their work just for this. But we can correct
it for future wraps.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-02-07 15:17:20 | pgsql: Initialize number_of_jobs in NewRestoreOptions |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2017-02-07 12:03:56 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Release note updates. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-02-07 14:30:17 | Re: GSoC 2017 |
| Previous Message | Daniele Varrazzo | 2017-02-07 14:14:48 | 'text' instead of 'unknown' in Postgres 10 |