Re: REINDEX ALL and CLUSTER ALL

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX ALL and CLUSTER ALL
Date: 2002-08-27 17:45:20
Message-ID: 200208271745.g7RHjK114530@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


I am not sure, but it certainly makes sense that it would drop the index
on failure. I would never expect it to fail, however.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

scott.marlowe wrote:
> Sorry, that should have been:
>
> Isn't it true that reindex's behavior ON A FAILURE is to simply, quietly
> delete the index? that was reported ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >
> > REINDEX just rebuilds the index, not just drop it. In fact, 7.3 will
> > have a reindexdb script.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > scott.marlowe wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > > Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > > > Would it be worth adding REINDEX ALL and CLUSTER ALL as actual SQL commands?
> > > > > This would be neat. Plus, it means we don't have to worry about having
> > > > > unix-only script in the distro once we have Win32 support.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, we should just leave the 'ALL' off. That will make them behave
> > > > > like VACUUM without arguments...
> > > >
> > > > Wow, now that is a nify idea! Let me add it to TODO and we can get rid
> > > > of the shell scripts entirely:
> > > >
> > > > o Allow CLUSTER to cluster all tables, remove clusterdb
> > > > o Allow REINDEX to rebuild all indexes, remove /contrib/reindex
> > > >
> > > > If we ever get the index growth fixed, we will not need the reindex
> > > > change, I guess, but maybe if they have some index corruption but they
> > > > are not sure where it may be helpful.
> > >
> > > Isn't it true that reindex's behavior is to simply, quietly delete the
> > > index? that was reported by someone when all this was going around
> > > before. I wrote my own reindex script that basically (in a single
> > > transaction) grabbed the definition of the index, dropped said index, then
> > > recreated it, then committed the transaction, so that if it failed for any
> > > reason, the old index was still there.
> > >
> > > If reindex does "lose" the index on failure then we need to look at
> > > changing how it works before we recommend it as a "daily maintenance
> > > routine".
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-08-27 18:27:17 Re: Large file support available
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2002-08-27 17:14:58 Re: REINDEX ALL and CLUSTER ALL