| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0 |
| Date: | 2014-11-12 21:10:56 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZtd=sa8LD0tnWgRDzx-Zzt_g_FnPf9jtj61z_rbuse6w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> If REINDEX cannot work without an exclusive lock, we should invent some
> other qualifier, like WITH FEWER LOCKS.
What he said.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-12 21:11:58 | Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-12 21:03:40 | Re: Error building the EnterpriseDB mysql_fdw on OSX |