Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Release note updates.
> Sorry for not noticing earlier, but there is a bug in the notes: Mmm, right. > May I suggest > + If <command>CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY</> was used to build an index > + that depends on a column not previously indexed, then rows > + updated by transactions that ran concurrently with > + the <command>CREATE INDEX</> command could have missed receiving > + index entries. Can we say "pre-existing rows that were updated by...", or is that too optimistic? (I fear this is too late for the current set of releases; I don't want to make the packagers redo their work just for this. But we can correct it for future wraps.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers