Re: pgsql-server/src/backend catalog/index.c comma ...

"Hiroshi Inoue" <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> I committed the fixes a few minutes ago. I now actually believe that
>> reindexing system tables works ;-) ... hopefully Hiroshi does too.

> I don't see your commit message yet.

CVS reports to the committers list seem to be wedged this afternoon :-(.
I already complained to Marc about it. But in the meantime here is the
cvs2cl entry:

2003-09-24 14:54 tgl

* doc/src/sgml/ref/postgres-ref.sgml,
doc/src/sgml/ref/reindex.sgml, src/backend/access/index/genam.c,
src/backend/access/transam/xact.c, src/backend/catalog/index.c,
src/backend/catalog/pg_largeobject.c,
src/backend/commands/functioncmds.c,
src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c, src/backend/commands/vacuum.c,
src/backend/executor/execUtils.c,
src/backend/executor/nodeIndexscan.c,
src/backend/storage/ipc/sinval.c, src/backend/tcop/postgres.c,
src/backend/tcop/utility.c, src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c,
src/backend/utils/cache/syscache.c,
src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c, src/include/miscadmin.h,
src/include/catalog/index.h, src/include/utils/errcodes.h,
src/include/utils/rel.h, src/include/utils/relcache.h: Repair some
REINDEX problems per recent discussions. The relcache is now able
to cope with assigning new relfilenode values to nailed-in-cache
indexes, so they can be reindexed using the fully crash-safe
method. This leaves only shared system indexes as special cases.
Remove the 'index deactivation' code, since it provides no useful
protection in the shared- index case. Require reindexing of shared
indexes to be done in standalone mode, but remove other
restrictions on REINDEX. -P (IgnoreSystemIndexes) now prevents
using indexes for lookups, but does not disable index updates. It
is therefore safe to allow from PGOPTIONS. Upshot: reindexing
system catalogs can be done without a standalone backend for all
cases except shared catalogs.

It's essentially the same as what I posted two days ago, except I
thought it would be a good idea to make REINDEX TABLE take care of the
associated TOAST table too, rather than expecting users to deal with
the toast table separately.

> Is it wrong to believe I have a right to conitune the discussion ?

Not at all, but I already waited two days for your response, and I can't
put development on hold indefinitely. For now, those changes are in,
and you are welcome to suggest further improvements at your leisure.

regards, tom lane