Hi
On 2013-08-05 08:37:57 -0700, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Some of the issues raised by Andres and Noah have been addressed.
> These all seemed simple and non-controversial, so I've just applied
> the suggested fixes.
Cool!
> >>> I'd even suggest using BuildIndexInfo() or such on the indexes,
>
Some of the issues raised by Andres and Noah have been addressed.
These all seemed simple and non-controversial, so I've just applied
the suggested fixes.
Some issues remain, such as how best to create the temp table used
for the "diff" data, and the related simplification of the security
context
Andres Freund wrote:
> Hm. There seems to be more things that need some more improvement
> from a quick look.
>
> First, I have my doubts of the general modus operandy of
> CONCURRENTLY here. I think in many, many cases it would be faster
> to simply swap in the newly built heap + indexes in conc
On 2013-07-23 00:01:50 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-17 10:11:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Kevin Grittner writes:
> > > Add support for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY.
> >
> > The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
> > is broken.
>
> Jagarundi st
On 2013-07-22 19:09:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2013-07-17 10:11:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
> >> is broken.
>
> > Jagarundi still tells that story.
>
> Uh, no. Jagarundi was perfectly happy for
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2013-07-17 10:11:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
>> is broken.
> Jagarundi still tells that story.
Uh, no. Jagarundi was perfectly happy for several build cycles after
I committed 405a468. The buildfar
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-17 10:11:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Kevin Grittner writes:
>> > Add support for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY.
>>
>> The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
>> is broken.
>
> Jagarundi still
On 2013-07-17 10:11:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Grittner writes:
> > Add support for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY.
>
> The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
> is broken.
Jagarundi still tells that story. At least something like the following
patch s
Hitoshi Harada writes:
> Looks like rd_indpred is not correct if index relation is fresh.
> Something like this works for me.
> - if (indexRel->rd_indpred != NIL)
> + if (RelationGetIndexPredicate(indexRel) != NIL)
Hm, yeah, the direct access to rd_ind
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Grittner writes:
>> Add support for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY.
>
> The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
> is broken.
>
Looks like rd_indpred is not correct if index relation is fresh.
Something
Kevin Grittner writes:
> Add support for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY.
The buildfarm members that use -DCLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS say this patch
is broken.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to y
11 matches
Mail list logo
