On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 09/02/2014 11:10 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
>> The currently patch dose not hack catalog, just create new index
>> concurrently and
>> swap them.
>> So, It is supporting only UNIQUE index, I think.
>
> UNIQUE indexes, but not a UNIQUE constr
On 09/02/2014 11:10 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> The currently patch dose not hack catalog, just create new index
> concurrently and
> swap them.
> So, It is supporting only UNIQUE index, I think.
UNIQUE indexes, but not a UNIQUE constraint backed by a UNIQUE index, or
a PRIMARY KEY constraint bac
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 08/25/2014 02:36 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
>> command for concurrently reindexing.
>> If we specify "-C" option with any table then reindexdb do reindexing
On 08/25/2014 02:36 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
> command for concurrently reindexing.
> If we specify "-C" option with any table then reindexdb do reindexing
> concurrently with minimum lock necessary.
> Note that we
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2014-08-26 12:44:43 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I always was of the opinion that a exclusive lock is still *MUCH* better
>> than what we have today.
> Well, if somebody has
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-08-26 12:44:43 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I always was of the opinion that a exclusive lock is still *MUCH* better
> than what we have today.
Well, if somebody has some interest in that, here is a rebased patch
with the approach
On 2014-08-26 12:44:43 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >> +many. Although I'm not sure if we managed to find a safe relation swap.
>
> Well we didn't AFAIK. With the latest patch provided I could not
> really find any whole in the logic, and
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> +many. Although I'm not sure if we managed to find a safe relation swap.
Well we didn't AFAIK. With the latest patch provided I could not
really find any whole in the logic, and Andres felt that something may
be wrong miles away. If I'd revi
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On August 25, 2014 10:35:20 PM CEST, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>>Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao
>>wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko
>> wrote:
>>> >> this might be difficult
On August 25, 2014 10:35:20 PM CEST, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao
>wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko
> wrote:
>> >> this might be difficult to call this as --concurrently.
>> >> It might need to be change
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko
> > wrote:
> >> this might be difficult to call this as --concurrently.
> >> It might need to be change the name.
> >
> > I'm OK to say that as --concurrently if the
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko
> wrote:
>> this might be difficult to call this as --concurrently.
>> It might need to be change the name.
>
> I'm OK to say that as --concurrently if the document clearly
> explains that rest
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Sawada Masahiko
>> wrote:
>>> Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
>>> command for concurrently reindexing.
>>> I
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Sawada Masahiko
> wrote:
>> Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
>> command for concurrently reindexing.
>> If we specify "-C" option with any table then reindexdb do reindexi
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
> command for concurrently reindexing.
> If we specify "-C" option with any table then reindexdb do reindexing
> concurrently with minimum lock necessary.
> Note that we can
Hi all,
Attached WIP patch adds "-C (--concurrently)" option for reindexdb
command for concurrently reindexing.
If we specify "-C" option with any table then reindexdb do reindexing
concurrently with minimum lock necessary.
Note that we cannot use '-s' option (for system catalog) and '-C'
option a
16 matches
Mail list logo
