Re: More tests with USING INDEX replident and dropped indexes

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More tests with USING INDEX replident and dropped indexes
Date: 2020-06-03 06:13:47
Message-ID: 20200603061347.GJ89559@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 04:46:55PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> How about avoiding such an inconsistent situation? In that case,
> replica identity works as NOTHING, but pg_class.relreplident is still
> ‘i’, confusing users. It seems to me that dropping an index specified
> by REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX is not a valid operation.

This looks first like complicating RemoveRelations() or the internal
object removal APIs with a dedicated lookup at this index's pg_index
tuple, but you could just put that in index_drop when REINDEX
CONCURRENTLY is not used. Still, I am not sure if it is worth
complicating those code paths. It would be better to get more
opinions about that first.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-06-03 06:14:35 Re: Internal key management system
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-06-03 06:00:53 Re: elog(DEBUG2 in SpinLocked section.