Thread

Commits

  1. Remove variable "concurrent" from ReindexStmt

  1. Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-09-02T11:03:26Z

    Hi all,
    
    $subject has been mentioned a couple of times, including today:
    https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200902010012.GE1489@paquier.xyz
    
    We have a boolean argument in ReindexStmt to control a concurrent
    run, and we also have in parallel of that a bitmask to control the
    options of the statement, which feels like a duplicate.  Attached is a
    patch to refactor the whole, adding CONCURRENTLY as a member of the
    available options.  This simplifies a bit the code.
    
    Any thoughts?
    --
    Michael
    
  2. Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean

    Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> — 2020-09-02T11:17:32Z

    On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 1:03 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
    >
    > Hi all,
    >
    > $subject has been mentioned a couple of times, including today:
    > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200902010012.GE1489@paquier.xyz
    >
    > We have a boolean argument in ReindexStmt to control a concurrent
    > run, and we also have in parallel of that a bitmask to control the
    > options of the statement, which feels like a duplicate.  Attached is a
    > patch to refactor the whole, adding CONCURRENTLY as a member of the
    > available options.  This simplifies a bit the code.
    >
    > Any thoughts?
    
    
    +1
    
     struct ReindexIndexCallbackState
     {
    - bool concurrent; /* flag from statement */
    + bool options; /* flag from statement */
      Oid locked_table_oid; /* tracks previously locked table */
     };
    
    Shouldn't options be an int?  The rest of the patch looks good to me.
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-09-03T02:14:38Z

    On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 01:17:32PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
    > Shouldn't options be an int?  The rest of the patch looks good to me.
    
    It should, thanks for looking at it.  Let's wait a couple of days and
    see if others have any comments.  If there are no objections, I'll try
    to commit this one.
    --
    Michael
    
  4. Re: Refactor ReindexStmt and its "concurrent" boolean

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2020-09-04T01:51:39Z

    On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 11:14:38AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
    > It should, thanks for looking at it.  Let's wait a couple of days and
    > see if others have any comments.  If there are no objections, I'll try
    > to commit this one.
    
    And applied.
    --
    Michael