| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | troy(at)frericks(dot)us, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17446: Suggest updating the section title "Building Indexes Concurrently" |
| Date: | 2022-03-23 05:05:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaMhJXP1_n_-KfrjvqCJtG_M0NSqMCOxEQQqYhVoQZpoA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 4:19 PM PG Bug reporting form <
noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>
> Bug reference: 17446
> Logged by: Troy Frericks
> Email address: troy(at)frericks(dot)us
> PostgreSQL version: 10.17
> Operating system: Documentation suggestion, ambiguous
> Description:
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/sql-createindex.html#SQL-CREATEINDEX-CONCURRENTLY
>
> Suggest changing section title "Building Indexes Concurrently" to "Building
> Indexes Using the CONCURRENTLY Parameter" to eliminate any ambiguity.
>
That seems worse. If anything the title should answer the question
"Concurrent with What?". Right now one infers it means with other
read/write activity on the table - as opposed to, say, additional indexing
operations on different connections, which may or may not touch the same
tables. This is the concept of concurrency we want to refer to here - the
parameter has already been described above.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-03-23 08:48:43 | Re: BUG #17385: "RESET transaction_isolation" inside serializable transaction causes Assert at the transaction end |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-03-23 04:41:19 | Re: BUG #17441: shm_mq receive less data than the sender sends |