Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0
Date: 2014-11-10 18:24:58
Message-ID: CAMkU=1zO8zAXsrqd42GEeP06ehWtr96qhpDJ8_tUGOuR024VSA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Updated patch is attached.
> Please find attached an updated patch with the following things changed:
> - Addition of tab completion in psql for all new commands
> - Addition of a call to WaitForLockers in index_concurrent_swap to
> ensure that there are no running transactions on the parent table
> running before exclusive locks are taken on the index and its
> concurrent entry. Previous patch versions created deadlocks because of
> that, issue spotted by the isolation tests integrated in the patch.
> - Isolation tests for reindex concurrently are re-enabled by default.
> Regards,
>

It looks like this needs another rebase, I get failures
on index.c, toasting.c, indexcmds.c, and index.h

Thanks,

Jeff

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-11-10 18:29:13 Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-11-10 18:15:07 Re: Proposal: Log inability to lock pages during vacuum