Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>,
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-02-07T08:15:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > What about > > > 3) Use reltoastidxid if != InvalidOid and manually build the list (using > > RelationGetIndexList) otherwise? > > Do we actually need reltoastidxid at all? I always thought having that > field was a case of premature optimization. There might be some case > for keeping it to avoid breaking any client-side code that might be > looking at it ... but if you're proposing changing the field contents > anyway, that argument goes right out the window. > Here is an interesting idea. Could there be some performance impact if we remove this field and replace it by RelationGetIndexList to fetch the list of indexes that need to be inserted? -- Michael
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Background worker processes
- da07a1e85651 9.3.0 cited
-
Fix assorted bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
- 3c84046490be 9.3.0 cited
-
Work around unportable behavior of malloc(0) and realloc(NULL, 0).
- 09ac603c36d1 9.3.0 cited
-
Properly set relpersistence for fake relcache entries.
- beb850e1d873 9.3.0 cited