| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0 |
| Date: | 2017-03-02 01:25:23 |
| Message-ID: | af867d20-1406-38c0-0a58-2cf1fce7240f@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/28/17 11:21 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> The only downside I can see to this approach is that we no logner will
> able to reindex catalog tables concurrently, but in return it should be
> easier to confirm that this approach can be made work.
Another downside is any stored regclass fields will become invalid.
Admittedly that's a pretty unusual use case, but it'd be nice if there
was at least a way to let users fix things during the rename phase
(perhaps via an event trigger).
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-02 01:28:07 | Re: 2017-03 Commitfest In Progress |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-03-02 01:23:24 | Re: port of INSTALL file generation to XSLT |