From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CLUSTER not lose indexes |
Date: | 2002-07-05 06:28:47 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0207050216160.19948-200000@cm-lcon-46-187.cm.vtr.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane dijo:
> I think you probably want a CommandCounterIncrement at the bottom of the
> loop (after setRelhasindex). If it works as-is it's just by chance,
> ie due to internal CCI calls in index_create.
Done.
> + tuple = SearchSysCache(RELOID, ObjectIdGetDatum(attrs->indexOID),
> + 0, 0, 0);
> + if (!HeapTupleIsValid(tuple))
> + break;
>
> Breaking out of the loop hardly seems an appropriate response to this
> failure condition. Not finding the index' pg_class entry is definitely
> an error.
Sure. elog(ERROR) now. I'm not sure what was I thinking when I wrote
that.
> I'd also suggest more-liberal commenting, as well as more attention to
> updating the existing comments to match new reality.
I'm afraid I cannot get too verbose no matter how hard I try. I hope
this one is OK.
> In general, I'm not thrilled about expending more code on the existing
> fundamentally-broken implementation of CLUSTER. We need to look at
> making use of the ability to write a new version of a table (or index)
> under a new relfilenode value, without changing the table's OID.
> However, some parts of your patch will probably still be needed when
> someone gets around to making that happen, so I won't object for now.
Will try to do this.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]atentus.com>)
Licensee shall have no right to use the Licensed Software
for productive or commercial use. (Licencia de StarOffice 6.0 beta)
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
cluster.patch | text/plain | 6.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-07-05 06:36:41 | Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-07-05 06:28:04 | Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-05 14:27:05 | Re: CLUSTER not lose indexes |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-05 05:45:09 | Re: CLUSTER not lose indexes |