From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
    Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
    Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
In-reply-to: 
 <CADzfLwWdc1KBZ2qNV1x7gmZtHdmAYOoq0A2Rw72O2-wEou=FRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <202507262156.sb455angijk6@alvherre.pgsql>
 <202510301734.pj4uds3mqxx4@alvherre.pgsql>
 <CADzfLwWdc1KBZ2qNV1x7gmZtHdmAYOoq0A2Rw72O2-wEou=FRg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
   message dated "Sat, 01 Nov 2025 19:16:00 +0100."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2025 08:56:40 +0100
Message-ID: <11472.1762156600@localhost>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/11472.1762156600%40localhost>
Precedence: bulk

Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello!
>=20
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 12:17=E2=80=AFAM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no=
-ip.org> wrote:
> > Here's a new installment of this series, v25, including the CONCURRENTLY
> > part, which required some conflict fixes on top of the much-changed
> > v24-0001 patch.
>=20
>  > * cluster.c
>  > *      CLUSTER a table on an index.  This is now also used for VACUUM =
FULL.

ok

>  Should we add something about repack here?
>=20
>  > ii_ExclusinOps
>  typo here.

ok

>  >  * index is inserted into catalogs and needs to be built later on.
>  Now it is only in case concurrently =3D=3D true

ok

> >   * Build the index information for the new index.  Note that rebuild of
> >   * indexes with exclusion constraints is not supported, hence there is=
 no
> >   * need to fill all the ii_Exclusion* fields.
>=20
> Now the function supports its in !concurrently mode. Should we fill
> ii_Exclusion? Also, it says
>=20
> > If !concurrently, ii_ExclusinOps is currently not needed.

> But it is not clear - why not?

Right, makeIndexInfo() needs to be adjusted.

>=20
> >   newInfo =3D makeIndexInfo(oldInfo->ii_NumIndexAttrs,
> >                           oldInfo->ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs,
> >                           oldInfo->ii_Am,
> >                           indexExprs,
> >                           indexPreds,
> >                           oldInfo->ii_Unique,
> >                           oldInfo->ii_NullsNotDistinct,
> >                           false,  /* not ready for inserts */
> >                           true,
> >                           indexRelation->rd_indam->amsummarizing,
> >                           oldInfo->ii_WithoutOverlaps);
>=20
> Is it ok we pass isready =3D=3D false if !concurrent?
> Also, we pass concurrent =3D=3D true even if concurrently =3D=3D false - =
feels
> strange and probably wrong.

You're right, both arguments are wrong.

> > This difference does has no impact on XidInMVCCSnapshot().
> Should it be "This difference has no impact"?

ok

> > * pgoutput_cluster.c
> > *       src/backend/replication/pgoutput_cluster/pgoutput_cluster.c
>  it is pgoutput_trepack.c :)

ok

I'll fix all the problems in the next version. Thanks!

--=20
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com