Re: Allowing REINDEX to have an optional name

On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:04:58AM +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
> And we already have a situation where this already happens with REINDEX
> DATABASE: if you use CONCURRENTLY, it skips system catalogs already and
> prints a warning. In both cases there are good technical reasons to
> skip catalog indexes and to change the workflow to use separate
> commands.

The case with CONCURRENTLY is different though: the option will never
work on system catalogs so we have to skip them.  Echoing with others
on this thread, I don't think that we should introduce a different
behavior on what's basically the same grammar.  That's just going to
lead to more confusion.  So REINDEX DATABASE with or without a
database name appended to it should always mean to reindex the
catalogs on top of the existing relations.
--
Michael