| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ragnar <gnari(at)hive(dot)is>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Online index builds |
| Date: | 2006-12-08 00:44:10 |
| Message-ID: | 23215.1165538650@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-announce pgsql-general pgsql-www |
Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> I don't understand. CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY can't be run in a
> transaction block anyway, so a REINDEX CONCURRENTLY wouldn't either. So
> how (or when) would you deadlock?
The problem is you need to upgrade from a nonexclusive table lock to an
exclusive one before you could drop the old index. If someone else
is waiting to get a conflicting lock, boom ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 01:07:57 | Re: Online index builds |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 00:31:56 | Re: Online index builds |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 01:07:57 | Re: Online index builds |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 00:31:56 | Re: Online index builds |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 01:07:57 | Re: Online index builds |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-08 00:31:56 | Re: Online index builds |