| From: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2025-12-08 09:58:33 |
| Message-ID: | 202512080955.y7zzghv4vag2@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-Dec-06, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> From my perspective, the correct solution - is to just remove the
> error message, because it looks obsolete now.
Rereading this -- did you mean to propose that a possible fix was to
remove the "invalid arbiter index list" error? I had understood
something different.
Your idea downthread of changing the way that check works (so that we
don't throw an error in this case, but we continue to double-check that
the arbiter list is sensible) sounds reasonable to me. Do you want to
propose a specific check for it?
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
<inflex> really, I see PHP as like a strange amalgamation of C, Perl, Shell
<crab> inflex: you know that "amalgam" means "mixture with mercury",
more or less, right?
<crab> i.e., "deadly poison"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2025-12-08 10:12:27 | Re: 64-bit wait_event and introduction of 32-bit wait_event_arg |
| Previous Message | Amul Sul | 2025-12-08 09:58:11 | Re: alter check constraint enforceability |