On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:15 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jk...@postgresql.org> wrote: > > Perhaps it is also worth mentioning that you can use REINDEX without > > CONCURRENTLY, even before upgrading. > > I'm hesitant on giving too many options. We did put out the "warning" > announcement providing this as an option. I do think that folks who are > running CIC/RIC are sensitive to locking, and a plain old "REINDEX" may > be viable except in an emergency.
The locking implications for plain REINDEX are surprising IMV -- and so I suggest sticking with what you have here. In many cases using plain REINDEX is not meaningfully different to taking a full AccessExclusiveLock on the table (we only acquire an AEL on the index, but in practice that can be a distinction without a difference). We at least went some way towards making the situation with REINDEX locking clearer in a doc patch that recently became commit 8ac700ac. -- Peter Geoghegan
