On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 10:39:53PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Copying this info in index_concurrently_swap seems a bit strange - we're > copying other stuff there, but this is modifying something we've already > copied before. I understand why we do it there to make this backpatchable, > but maybe it'd be good to mention this in a comment (or at least the commit > message). We could do this in the backbranches only and the "correct" way in > master, but that does not seem worth it.
Thanks. > One minor comment - the code says this: > > /* no need for a refresh if both match */ > if (attstattarget == att->attstattarget) > continue; > > Isn't that just a different way to say "attstattarget is not default")? For REINDEX CONCURRENTLY, yes. I was thinking here about the case where this code is used for other purposes in the future, where attstattarget may not be -1. I'll see about applying this stuff after the next version is tagged then. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
