Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind
Date
Msg-id 20160527190558.GA703687@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind  (Nikolay Shaplov <n.shaplov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind
List pgsql-hackers
Nikolay Shaplov wrote:

> Story start from the point that I found out that a.m. can not forbid changing 
> some of it's reloptions with ALTER INDEX command. That was not necessary  
> before, because all reloptions at that existed at that time can be changed on 
> fly. But now for bloom index it is unacceptable, because for changing bloom's 
> reloptions for existing index will lead to index malfunction.

Hmm, this sounds like a bug to me.  In BRIN, if you change the
pages_per_range option for an existing index, the current index
continues to work because the value used during the last index build is
stored in the metapage.  Only when you reindex after changing the option
the new value takes effect.

I think Bloom should do likewise.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Hard to maintain duplication in contain_volatile_functions_not_nextval_walker
Next
From: Nikolay Shaplov
Date:
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Move all am-related reloption code into src/backend/access/[am-name] and get rid of relopt_kind