| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENT? |
| Date: | 2018-11-09 04:32:48 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f_xMao--uZb_v3D5U_8BObhGLVKwCosBthM=oys4CpbKw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 9 November 2018 at 17:05, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is this very useful feature on the TODO list, and high enough that it might
> get into v12? (Indexes supporting PK and FK constraints just can't be
> dropped to use CREATE INDEX CONCURRENT.)
There is a patch [1] in the current commitfest which allows indexes to
be renamed without taking an access exclusive lock. That's a sort of
precursor to allowing REINDEX CONCURRENTLY as, although we can build
indexes without blocking, we can't rename them and it's not much good
if you do a reindex and the new index appears with some other random
name. If that patch gets in with a good amount of time to spare then
there's a decent chance we'd see a reindex concurrently command patch
appear soon after.
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/20/1726/
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karsten Hilbert | 2018-11-09 09:25:18 | FIXED: backend crash on DELETE, reproducible locally |
| Previous Message | Ron | 2018-11-09 04:05:01 | REINDEX CONCURRENT? |