| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrey Klychkov <aaklychkov(at)mail(dot)ru>, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alter index rename concurrently to |
| Date: | 2018-08-02 19:57:13 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ6vjMjQmzbpQkLBB9iY03SBx+gWHpsgwpyjzQAoZ3nrw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> Right. If nobody sees a reason not to change that, I think we should.
>> It would make the behavior more predictable with, I hope, no real
>> loss.
>
> What precisely are you proposing?
Inserting AcceptInvalidationMessages() in some location that
guarantees it will be executed at least once per SQL statement. I
tentatively propose the beginning of parse_analyze(), but I am open to
suggestions.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-08-02 20:02:51 | Re: Alter index rename concurrently to |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-08-02 19:53:41 | Re: FailedAssertion on partprune |