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
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... |