From: Ronan Dunklau <ronan@dunklau.fr>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Preserve attstattarget on REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 08:22:17 +0100
Message-ID: <11797662.T7Z3S40VBb@laptop-ronand>
In-Reply-To: <YByqzE9qu16vuEB+@paquier.xyz>
References: <16628084.uLZWGnKmhe@laptop-ronand>
 <80274775044a11f6f42af9c39640a055@dunklau.fr> <YByqzE9qu16vuEB+@paquier.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Precedence: bulk

Le vendredi 5 f=E9vrier 2021, 03:17:48 CET Michael Paquier a =E9crit :
> ConstructTupleDescriptor() does not matter much, but this patch is not
> acceptable to me as it touches the area of the index creation while
> statistics on an index expression can only be changed with a special
> flavor of ALTER INDEX with column numbers.  This would imply an ABI
> breakage, so it cannot be backpatched as-is.

I'm not surprised by this answer, the good news is it's being back-patched.=
=20

>=20
> Let's copy this data in index_concurrently_swap() instead.  The
> attached patch does that, and adds a test cheaper than what was
> proposed.  There is a minor release planned for next week, so I may be
> better to wait after that so as we have enough time to agree on a
> solution.

Looks good to me ! Thank you.

=2D-=20
Ronan Dunklau