| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait |
| Date: | 2020-08-11 15:14:55 |
| Message-ID: | 3397538.1597158895@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Why is a CIC in active index-building something we need to wait for?
> Wouldn't it fall under a similar kind of logic to the other snapshot
> types we can explicitly ignore? CIC can't be run in a manual
> transaction, so the snapshot it holds won't be used to perform
> arbitrary operations (i.e., the reason why a manual ANALYZE can't be
> ignored).
Expression indexes that call user-defined functions seem like a
pretty serious risk factor for that argument. Those are exactly
the same expressions that ANALYZE will evaluate, as a result of
which we judge it unsafe to ignore. Why would CIC be different?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2020-08-11 15:21:10 | Re: posgres 12 bug (partitioned table) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-08-11 15:02:59 | Re: Switch to multi-inserts for pg_depend |