Re: ALTER tbl rewrite loses CLUSTER ON index
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2020-03-16T14:25:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2020-Mar-16, Justin Pryzby wrote: > Also, should we call it "is_index_clustered", since otherwise it sounds alot > like "+get_index_clustered" (without "is"), which sounds like it takes a table > and returns which index is clustered. That might be just as useful for some of > these callers. Amit's proposed name seems to match lsyscache.c usual conventions better. > Should we use your get_index_isclustered more widely ? Yeah, in cluster(), mark_index_clustered(). -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
Refactor cluster.c to use new routine get_index_isclustered()
- 8ef9451f58ee 13.0 landed
-
Preserve clustered index after rewrites with ALTER TABLE
- 3f77a670241d 9.5.22 landed
- 61a161fe4421 9.6.18 landed
- cef2b8d52c59 10.13 landed
- 41faafbd75a5 11.8 landed
- 3e62dd3a937b 12.3 landed
- a40caf5f862c 13.0 landed
-
Preserve replica identity index across ALTER TABLE rewrite
- 1cc9c2412cc9 13.0 cited
-
Remove RangeIOData->typiofunc
- a77315fdf2a1 13.0 cited
-
Preserve pg_index.indisclustered across REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
- f087d63a45b5 12.3 landed
- d79fb88ac738 13.0 landed