Re: Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : REINDEX SCHEMA
Date: 2014-10-13 14:16:55
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZs6ein29YaD_2Sw7=JMY8CBiFtEJzxmazsOp31=yuAQA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
>> Sawada Masahiko wrote:
>> > Attached WIP patch adds new syntax REINEX SCHEMA which does reindexing
>> > all table of specified schema.
>> > There are syntax dose reindexing specified index, per table and per database,
>> > but we can not do reindexing per schema for now.
>>
>> It seems doubtful that there really is much use for this feature, but if
>> there is, I think a better syntax precedent is the new ALTER TABLE ALL
>> IN TABLESPACE thingy, rather than your proposed REINDEX SCHEMA.
>> Something like REINDEX TABLE ALL IN SCHEMA perhaps.
>
> Yeah, I tend to agree that we should be looking at the 'ALL IN
> TABLESPACE' and 'ALL IN SCHEMA' type of commands to keep things
> consistent. This might be an alternative for the vacuum / analyze /
> reindex database commands also..

Urgh. I don't have a problem with that syntax in general, but it
clashes pretty awfully with what we're already doing for REINDEX
otherwise.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-10-13 14:19:00 Re: JsonbValue to Jsonb conversion
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-10-13 14:15:29 Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL 9.4 mmap(2) performance regression on FreeBSD...