Re: REINDEX SCHEMA/DATABASE/SYSTEM weak with dropped relations

From: Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX SCHEMA/DATABASE/SYSTEM weak with dropped relations
Date: 2020-09-01 10:25:27
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 01.09.2020 04:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have added some extra comments. There is one in
> ReindexRelationConcurrently() to mention that there should be no extra
> use of MISSING_OK once the list of indexes is built as session locks
> are taken where needed.
Great, it took me a moment to understand the logic around index list
check at first pass.
> Does the version attached look fine to you? I have done one round of
> indentation while on it.

Yes, this version is good.

Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Georgios 2020-09-01 10:27:31 Re: Include access method in listTables output
Previous Message Michael Banck 2020-09-01 10:22:29 [patch] Fix checksum verification in base backups for zero page headers