Horton

Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-02-08T00:43:13Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 12:07:01PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Feb-07, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Another thing I was thinking of: We need some database-global tests.
>> For example, at some point during development, I had broken some variant
>> of REINDEX DATABASE.  Where could we put those tests?  Maybe with reindexdb?
> 
> What's wrong with a new reindex.sql in regress?

Depending on the numbers of objects created and remaining around
before the script is run in the main suite, this would be costly.  I
think that this approach would not scale well in the long-term.
Having TAP test with reindexdb gives you access to a full instance
with its contents always fully known at test time.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Prevent reindex of invalid indexes on TOAST tables

  2. Rework handling of invalid indexes with REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

  3. Split builtins.h to a new header ruleutils.h