On 03/02/2017 02:25 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 2/28/17 11:21 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
The only downside I can see to this approach is that we no logner will
able to reindex catalog tables concurrently, but in return it should be
easier to confirm that this approach can be made work.
Another downside is any stored regclass fields will become invalid.
Admittedly that's a pretty unusual use case, but it'd be nice if there
was at least a way to let users fix things during the rename phase
(perhaps via an event trigger).
Good point, but I agree with Andres here. Having REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
issue event triggers seems strange to me. While it does create and drop
indexes as part of its implementation, it is actually just an index
maintenance job.
Andreas
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
