Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 14:52:05 -0800
From: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Message-ID: <20251103225205.a4.nmisch@google.com>
References: 
 <CANtu0ojswSmzq7NHj6seOBkcxXHe5oxdZGGgku7zc1_ueHN+2g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANtu0ohAo7Cgu4q8FsvX6=oWEz3BOoovxeRoAJWu=kFpeKd71w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANtu0ohStYQkJL+_=40Odcqu2A4QPrM_VmofwkkudHGHFgymkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADzfLwWmxz0W+_iquiiBTP66ZFx5zhe1EGojurrtSop6sXrR=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADzfLwWtK9R3GvEp7ANfO3pE3dbpD3T99f9aGFMwV4HSerHE5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADzfLwWo+FV9WSeOah9F1r=4haa6eay1hNvYYy_WfziJeK+aLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20251027180606.f4.nmisch@google.com>
 <CADzfLwW4-uz8DQn0q5J3EUDaS3bEj2UyKX_CDY_qKos5ozSHjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20251102232105.a3@rfd.leadboat.com>
 <CADzfLwU+oXdzY9xZQ2ayTROzgrEHxf=S8BV_mRSkXv_ZCukrug@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADzfLwU+oXdzY9xZQ2ayTROzgrEHxf=S8BV_mRSkXv_ZCukrug@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20251103225205.a4.nmisch%40google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 09:41:00PM +0100, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 12:21 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > Thanks.  Does "ON CONFLICT ON CONSTRAINT constraint_name" avoid the problem w/
> > concurrent REINDEX CONCURRENTLY?  A search of the thread found no mention of
> > "ON CONSTRAINT".  It seems safe to assume that clause would avoid problems w/
> > CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, but that's less certain for REINDEX.
> 
> It is also affected. There is a special
> reindex_concurrently_upsert_on_constraint spec in the patch.
> And even a special commit (0004) to fix it :)

My mistake.  I've redone the mbox search that I thought I had done.  That
search should have found it yesterday, so I must have made a typo then.

> I removed the mention of  "ON CONSTRAINT" and added a small comment
> near infer_arbiter_indexes.
> 
> Doc patch is 0001, other - specs and fixes for future.

I re-flowed the new comment to the standard 78 columns and pushed 0001.
Thanks.