From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, maximilian.chrzan@here.com,
        pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18959: Name collisions of expression indexes during parallel
 Index creations on a pratitioned table.
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+TgmoYfLt-gJKQLbb=+uSSNWYAzQVCgkfA9gQBBXUObg2CZMA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <18959-f63b53b864bb1417@postgresql.org>
 <CAFiTN-vB9UHF0yJxFynKuFiLkw094z7KLyDw4EAfUeaj1pZ00g@mail.gmail.com>
 <1081051.1750260111@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1138732.1750265195@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAFiTN-tVuS7pWbSZtCh5kAsGihen5ESpirS811KNFPCgLBm1WQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1802526.1750366786@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAFiTN-t0LFgiHgD7DvHZtCxL46X3qdARAmYoLREVizH_YyEn6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2315732.1756482946@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+Tgmoagq6dvUcs9fbzMeZjngscnW6s2WgYrwpcedFp2jnc_LA@mail.gmail.com>
 <618784.1757952926@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoYfLt-gJKQLbb=+uSSNWYAzQVCgkfA9gQBBXUObg2CZMA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 15 Sep 2025 14:23:45 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <658983.1757966786.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 16:06:26 -0400
Message-ID: <658984.1757966786@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/658984.1757966786%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 12:15 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> So, how do we move forward?  I'm perfectly willing to look into
>> the derive-a-name-from-the-expression idea, but I think that'd
>> best be done in a separate patch.

> I'm not sure. To me, the munging of everything together under the name
> "expr" is the root of the problem here, and since this patch isn't
> really addressing that problem, it's kind of to one side of what I see
> as the main point. However, that's a judgement call, and if you or
> others see it differently, then so be it.

Well, let's leave it as a difference of opinion for the moment.
I do agree that improving the names generated for expression indexes
would be useful independently of this.  I propose setting this patch
aside for the time being, and I will go look into that, and then
if that gets accepted we can come back here and discuss how much
of a problem remains.

			regards, tom lane