On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:08 AM, Petr Jelinek > <petr.jeli...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Back when writing the original patch set, I was also playing with the >> idea of having CREATE SUBSCRIPTION do multiple committed steps in >> similar fashion to CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY but that leaves mess behind >> on failure which also wasn't very popular outcome.
There is no inherent reason why the CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY style of using multiple transactions makes it necessary to leave a mess behind in the event of an error or hard crash. Is someone going to get around to fixing the problem for CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY (e.g., having extra steps to drop the useless index during recovery)? IIRC, this was always the plan. -- Peter Geoghegan VMware vCenter Server https://www.vmware.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers