Alvaro Herrera <> 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 (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to