Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index

On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:22 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 01:31:17AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Forking this thread, since the existing CFs have been closed.
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20200914143102.GX18552%40telsasoft.com#58b1056488451f8594b0f0ba40996afd
> >
> > The strategy is to create catalog entries for all tables with indisvalid=false,
> > and then process them like REINDEX CONCURRENTLY. If it's interrupted, it
> > leaves INVALID indexes, which can be cleaned up with DROP or REINDEX, same as
> > CIC on a plain table.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 01:37:44AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:37:42PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 08:15:05PM +0800, 李杰(慎追) wrote:
> > > > > As shown above, an error occurred while creating an index in the second partition.
> > > > > It can be clearly seen that the index of the partitioned table is invalid
> > > > > and the index of the first partition is normal, the second partition is invalid,
> > > > > and the Third Partition index does not exist at all.
> > > >
> > > > That's a problem. I really think that we should make the steps of the
> > > > concurrent operation consistent across all relations, meaning that all
> > > > the indexes should be created as invalid for all the parts of the
> > > > partition tree, including partitioned tables as well as their
> > > > partitions, in the same transaction. Then a second new transaction
> > > > gets used for the index build, followed by a third one for the
> > > > validation that switches the indexes to become valid.
> > >
> > > Note that the mentioned problem wasn't serious: there was missing index on
> > > child table, therefor the parent index was invalid, as intended. However I
> > > agree that it's not nice that the command can fail so easily and leave behind
> > > some indexes created successfully and some failed some not created at all.
> > >
> > > But I took your advice initially creating invalid inds.
> > ...
> > > That gave me the idea to layer CIC on top of Reindex, since I think it does
> > > exactly what's needed.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 02:56:55PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 05:11:03PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > > It would be good also to check if
> > > > we have a partition index tree that maps partially with a partition
> > > > table tree (aka no all table partitions have a partition index), where
> > > > these don't get clustered because there is no index to work on.
> > >
> > > This should not happen, since a incomplete partitioned index is "invalid".
>
> @cfbot: rebased over recent changes to indexcmds.c

Status update for a commitfest entry.

This patch has not been updated and "Waiting on Author" status since
Nov 30. Are you still planning to work on this, Justin? If no, I'm
going to set this entry to "Returned with Feedback" barring
objections.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/