Horton

Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Date: 2018-12-13T23:20:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 09/12/2018 19:55, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
>> reindex table CONCURRENTLY test;

By the way, does this syntax make sense?  I haven't seen a discussion on
this anywhere in the various threads.  I keep thinking that

    reindex concurrently table test;

would make more sense.  How about in combination with (verbose)?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

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