Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Date: 2012-10-03T14:52:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, October 03, 2012 04:28:59 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Maybe I am missing something here, but reindex concurrently should do > > 1) BEGIN > > 2) Lock table in share update exlusive > > 3) lock old index > > 3) create new index > > 4) obtain session locks on table, old index, new index > > 5) commit > > 6) process till newindex->insisready (no new locks) > > 7) process till newindex->indisvalid (no new locks) > > 8) process till !oldindex->indisvalid (no new locks) > > 9) process till !oldindex->indisready (no new locks) > > 10) drop all session locks > > 11) lock old index exlusively which should be "invisible" now > > 12) drop old index > > You can't drop the session locks until you're done. Consider somebody > else trying to do a DROP TABLE between steps 10 and 11, for instance. Yea, the session lock on the table itself probably shouldn't be dropped. If were holding only that one there shouldn't be any additional deadlock dangers when dropping the index due to lock upgrades as were doing the normal dance any DROP INDEX does. They seem pretty unlikely in a !valid !ready table anyway. Greetings, Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Background worker processes
- da07a1e85651 9.3.0 cited
-
Fix assorted bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
- 3c84046490be 9.3.0 cited
-
Work around unportable behavior of malloc(0) and realloc(NULL, 0).
- 09ac603c36d1 9.3.0 cited
-
Properly set relpersistence for fake relcache entries.
- beb850e1d873 9.3.0 cited