public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Ilya Gladyshev <[email protected]>
To: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
Cc: Alexander Pyhalov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: 李杰(慎追) <[email protected]>
Cc: 曾文旌(义从) <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2022 17:53:10 +0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<CAD21AoCHYE5=PU7kJGGUHZuYVrHTHqmpUxN+8-rLGYpdgPwJ9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 13:09 -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> 
> This beavior is fixed.  I re-factored and re-implented to use
> DefineIndex() for building indexes concurrently rather than
> reindexing.
> That makes the patch smaller, actually, and has the added benefit of
> splitting off the "Concurrently" part of DefineIndex() into a
> separate
> function.

Nice, I think it turned out pretty concise. I played around with the
patch quite a bit, didn't find any major problems, the only minor thing
that I can note is that we should skip the top parent index itself in
the loop not to increment the pg_stat counter, something like this:

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c
b/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c
index cfab45b999..9049540b5b 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c
@@ -1515,6 +1515,9 @@ DefineIndex(Oid relationId,
                        Oid                     indrelid =
lfirst_oid(lc);
                        Oid                     tabrelid =
IndexGetRelation(indrelid, false);
 
+                       if (indrelid == indexRelationId)
+                               continue;
+
                        if
(RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE(get_rel_relkind(indrelid)) &&
                                !get_index_isvalid(indrelid))
                        {
> 
> BTW, it causes the patch to fail to apply in cfbot when you send an
> additional (002) supplementary patch without including the original
> (001) patch.  You can name it *.txt to avoid the issue.
>  
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Cfbot#Which_attachments_are_considered_to_be_patches.3F
> 
> Thanks for looking.
> 
My bad, didn't know about this, thanks for the link.

On a side note, I noticed that reindex behaviour is strange on
partitioned tables, it doesn't mark partitioned tables as valid after
reindexing children, as I could understand from the code and mailing
lists, this is the intended behaviour, but I can't quite understand the
rationale for it, do you know why it is done this way?

view thread (28+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox