Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Shinoda, Noriyoshi (PN Japan A&PS Delivery)" <noriyoshi(dot)shinoda(at)hpe(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0
Date: 2019-04-11 03:59:52
Message-ID: 20190411035952.GL2728@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 03:50:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> And here is the patch to address this issue. It happens that a bit
> more than the dependency switch was lacking here:
> - At swap time, we need to have the new index definition track
> relispartition from the old index.
> - Again at swap time, the inheritance link needs to be updated between
> the old/new index and its parent when reindexing a partition index.

Peter, this is an open item, and I think as the committer of the
feature you are its owner. Well, in this case, I don't mind taking
the ownership as need be as I know this stuff. Anyway, could you have
a look at the patch proposed and see if you have any issues with it?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2019-04-11 04:01:45 Re: Zedstore - compressed in-core columnar storage
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-04-11 03:55:43 Re: Qestion about .partial WAL file