| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2025-11-03 22:52:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20251103225205.a4.nmisch@google.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 09:41:00PM +0100, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 12:21 AM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > Thanks. Does "ON CONFLICT ON CONSTRAINT constraint_name" avoid the problem w/
> > concurrent REINDEX CONCURRENTLY? A search of the thread found no mention of
> > "ON CONSTRAINT". It seems safe to assume that clause would avoid problems w/
> > CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, but that's less certain for REINDEX.
>
> It is also affected. There is a special
> reindex_concurrently_upsert_on_constraint spec in the patch.
> And even a special commit (0004) to fix it :)
My mistake. I've redone the mbox search that I thought I had done. That
search should have found it yesterday, so I must have made a typo then.
> I removed the mention of "ON CONSTRAINT" and added a small comment
> near infer_arbiter_indexes.
>
> Doc patch is 0001, other - specs and fixes for future.
I re-flowed the new comment to the standard 78 columns and pushed 0001.
Thanks.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mihail Nikalayeu | 2025-11-03 23:03:15 | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-11-03 22:49:15 | Re: Have the planner convert COUNT(1) / COUNT(not_null_col) to COUNT(*) |