From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |
Date: | 2021-01-13 21:48:37 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe_gm=JFna+BACJhY49UWef2pNRLfQ+GV7AqyLVcWdtT6Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:29 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > On 2021-Jan-13, James Coleman wrote:
> >>>> This is true. So I propose
> >>>> Like any long-running transaction, <command>REINDEX</command> can
> >>>> affect which tuples can be removed by concurrent <command>VACUUM</command>
> >>>> on any table.
>
> >> Looks like what got committed is "REINDEX on a table" not "on any",
> >> but I'm not sure that matters too much.
>
> > Ouch. The difference seems slight enough that it doesn't matter; is it
> > ungrammatical?
>
> I'd personally have written "on other tables" or "on another table",
> or left out that clause altogether and just said "concurrent
> <command>VACUUM</command>". I'm not sure it's ungrammatical exactly,
> but the antecedent of "a table" is a bit unclear; people might
> wonder if it means the table being reindexed.
It does mean the table being reindexed; the last phrase says "any
table" meaning "any other table".
James
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-13 22:00:28 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-13 21:29:31 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |