Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and indisreplident

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Euler Taveira <euler(dot)taveira(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and indisreplident
Date: 2020-06-04 02:23:36
Message-ID: 20200604022336.GP89559@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 12:40:38PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 at 03:54, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> I have bumped into $subject, causing a replica identity index to
>> be considered as dropped if running REINDEX CONCURRENTLY on it. This
>> means that the old tuple information would get lost in this case, as
>> a REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX without a dropped index is the same as
>> NOTHING.
>
> LGTM. I tested in both versions (12, master) and it works accordingly.

Thanks for the review. I'll try to get that fixed soon.

By the way, your previous email was showing up as part of my own email
with the indentation that was used so I missed it first. That's the
case as well here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH503wDaejzhP7+wA-hHS6c7NzE69oWqe5Zf_TYFu1epAwp6EQ@mail.gmail.com
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-06-04 02:25:00 Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-06-04 02:07:29 Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762