Small code simplification for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
This was left over from an earlier code structure.
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/6b8b5364ddd0e4d882562615c6b6c28638ade9f2
Modified Files
--
src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c | 10 +-
doc: Small documentation review for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Author: Justin Pryzby
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/173268f4d011fcae1f909c811e264baf6c838e7a
Modified Files
--
doc/src/sgml/ref/reindex.sgml | 24
1 file
doc: Fix typo
Author: Bossart, Nathan
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/0267629e1889b3e1e2e6b2f1b41e8993eff86a9b
Modified Files
--
doc/src/sgml/ref/reindex.sgml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Tweak some nbtree-related code comments.
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/9c7fb7e6d8d0fdcabbdc32daad2159812e538bd5
Modified Files
--
contrib/amcheck/verify_nbtree.c | 2 +-
src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtsearch.c | 3 ++-
src/backend/a
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 12:06:26PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 11:20 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
I've pushed a fix for this. The short version is that the serialized
representation was not respecting memory alignment requirements, which was
causing issues in machines sensit
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 11:20 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> I've pushed a fix for this. The short version is that the serialized
> representation was not respecting memory alignment requirements, which was
> causing issues in machines sensitive to this (ia64, sparc, hppa). It's a
> blind attempt, as I
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:37:11PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 07:33:36PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 11:29:12AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:27 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
It's a bit too late for pushing emergency fixes over
Fix memory alignment in pg_mcv_list serialization
Blind attempt at fixing ia64, hppa an sparc builds.
The serialized representation of MCV lists did not enforce proper memory
alignment for internal fields, resulting in deserialization issues on
platforms that are more sensitive to this (ia64, spa
On 2019-03-29 16:20:54 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 16:12, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>
> > On 2019-03-29 15:58:14 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 15:29, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > That's far from a trivial feature imo. It seems quite possible that
> >
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 9:12 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> But even so, you can't have unlogged changes that you then rely on. Even
> if there's no torn page issue. Currently BTP_HAS_GARBAGE and
> ItemIdMarkDead() are treated as hints - if we want to guarantee all
> these are accurate, I don't quite
On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 16:12, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-03-29 15:58:14 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 15:29, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > That's far from a trivial feature imo. It seems quite possible that
> we'd
> > > end up with increased overhead, because the current
Hi,
On 2019-03-29 15:58:14 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 15:29, Andres Freund wrote:
> > That's far from a trivial feature imo. It seems quite possible that we'd
> > end up with increased overhead, because the current logic can get away
> > with only doing hint bit style writ
Show table access methods as such in psql's \dA.
Previously we didn't display a type for table access methods.
Author: Haribabu Kommi
Discussion: CAJrrPGeeYOqP3hkZyohDx_8dot4zvPuPMDBmhJ=ic85ctbn...@mail.gmail.com
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/d3a5
On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 15:29, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-03-29 09:37:11 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > While trying to understand this, I see there is an even better way to
> > optimize this. Since we are removing dead index tuples, we could alter
> the
> > killed index tuple interface so
tableam: Comment fixes.
Author: Haribabu Kommi
Discussion: CAJrrPGeeYOqP3hkZyohDx_8dot4zvPuPMDBmhJ=ic85ctbn...@mail.gmail.com
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/ffa8444ce4828108e49d961cfa64e31078d978f0
Modified Files
--
src/backend/access/h
Hi,
On 2019-03-29 09:37:11 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> This commit message was quite confusing. It took me a while to realize this
> relates to btree index deletes and that what you mean is that we are
> calculcating the latestRemovedXid for index entries. That is related to but
> not same thing a
Reorganize Notes section in documentation of pg_checksums
This commit reorders the paragraphs of the Notes section in order of
importance, and clarifies better the safe uses of pg_checksums for
replication setups.
Author: Fabien Coelho
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/alpine.DEB.2.21.1903231404280
doc: Refine README.links further
suggested by Chapman Flack
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/c0a2ff474a47216031d1835f5878fa4f445f44fe
Modified Files
--
doc/src/sgml/README.links | 10 +++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletion
Allow existing VACUUM options to take a Boolean argument.
This makes VACUUM work more like EXPLAIN already does without changing
the meaning of any commands that already work. It is intended to
facilitate the addition of future VACUUM options that may take
non-Boolean parameters or that default t
Warn more strongly about the dangers of exclusive backup mode.
Especially, warn about the hazards of mishandling the backup_label
file. Adjust a couple of server messages to be more clear about
the hazards associated with removing backup_label files, too.
David Steele and Robert Haas, reviewed b
Fix incorrect code in new REINDEX CONCURRENTLY code
The previous code was adding pointers to transient variables to a
list, but by the time the list was read, the variable might be gone,
depending on the compiler. Fix it by making copies in the proper
memory context.
Branch
--
master
Detail
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 00:06, Andres Freund wrote:
> Compute XID horizon for page level index vacuum on primary.
>
> Previously the xid horizon was only computed during WAL replay.
This commit message was quite confusing. It took me a while to realize this
relates to btree index deletes and tha
Hi Peter,
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 07:26:53AM +, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
>
> This adds the CONCURRENTLY option to the REINDEX command. A REINDEX
> CONCURRENTLY on a specific index creates a new index (like CREATE
> INDEX CONCURRENTLY), then renames the old index away an
REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
This adds the CONCURRENTLY option to the REINDEX command. A REINDEX
CONCURRENTLY on a specific index creates a new index (like CREATE
INDEX CONCURRENTLY), then renames the old index away and the new index
in place and adjusts the dependencies, and then drops the old
index (li
24 matches
Mail list logo
