| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Correct docs re: rewriting indexes when table rewrite is skipped |
| Date: | 2022-03-30 21:41:36 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobsekq+FHMQ-Zc5KDOFxUTgVunVB33JMWzLtn3CKa4AZA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:33 PM James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hmm, having it match the way it works makes sense. Would you feel
> comfortable with an intermediate step (queueing up that as a larger
> change) changing the clause to something like "indexes will still have
> to be rebuilt unless the system can guarantee that the sort order is
> proven to be unchanged" (with appropriate wordsmithing to be a bit
> less verbose if possible)?
Yeah, that seems fine. It's arguable how much detail we should go into
here - but a statement of the form you propose is not misleading, and
that's what seems most important to me.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-03-30 21:44:55 | Re: pgsql: Add 'basebackup_to_shell' contrib module. |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-03-30 21:22:58 | Re: [Proposal] vacuumdb --schema only |