| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_index updates and SI invalidation |
| Date: | 2007-03-27 07:58:30 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0703270058p7eaec968hf3dcc2496d93d29c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/26/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
>
> It might be feasible to have RelationReloadClassinfo re-read the
> pg_index row and apply only the updates for specific known-changeable
> columns. The stuff it's worried about is the subsidiary data such
> as support function fmgr lookup records, but we don't need those to
> change on the fly.
>
>
>
Here is a patch which fixes this. We re-read part of the pg_index
row and update rd_index with the new data. I tested REINDEX and CIC
and both seems to work fine with the patch applied.
Tom, does this look good ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg_index_SI_inval.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2007-03-27 08:17:30 | Re: notification payloads |
| Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2007-03-27 07:57:13 | Re: BSD advertizing clause in some files |