Horton

Re: reindex concurrently and two toast indexes

Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-02-18T06:39:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 7:19 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 07:06:25AM +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 6:30 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> >> Hmm.  There could be an argument here for skipping invalid toast
> >> indexes within reindex_index(), because we are sure about having at
> >> least one valid toast index at anytime, and these are not concerned
> >> with CIC.
> >
> > Or even automatically drop any invalid index on toast relation in
> > reindex_relation, since those can't be due to a failed CIC?
>
> No, I don't like much outsmarting REINDEX with more index drops than
> it needs to do.  And this would not take care of the case with REINDEX
> INDEX done directly on a toast index.

Well, we could still do both but I get the objection.  Then skipping
invalid toast indexes in reindex_relation looks like the best fix.

Commits

  1. Prevent reindex of invalid indexes on TOAST tables

  2. Fix more issues with dependency handling at swap phase of REINDEX CONCURRENTLY