Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>

From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2013-06-22T03:50:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Hm. Looking at how this is currently used - I am afraid it's not
> correct... the reason RelationGetIndexList() returns a copy is that
> cache invalidations will throw away that list. And you do index_open()
> while iterating over it which will accept invalidation messages.
> Mybe it's better to try using RelationGetIndexList directly and measure
> whether that has a measurable impact=
By looking at the comments of RelationGetIndexList:relcache.c,
actually the method of the patch is correct because in the event of a
shared cache invalidation, rd_indexvalid is set to 0 when the index
list is reset, so the index list would get recomputed even in the case
of shared mem invalidation.
--
Michael


Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Background worker processes

  2. Fix assorted bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY.

  3. Work around unportable behavior of malloc(0) and realloc(NULL, 0).

  4. Properly set relpersistence for fake relcache entries.