Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 11:41 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Er, what's the point of that?
>
> > Rebuilding damaged indexes automatically, rather than barfing. I regard
> > that as a long term extension of crash recovery to bring a database back
> > to a usable state.
>
> Having crash recovery auto-rebuild indexes it thinks are damaged seems
> to me to be a pretty horrid idea. Just for starters, it would overwrite
> forensic evidence about the cause of the damage. A DBA might not wish
> the rebuild to happen *right then* in any case.
Are hash indexes going to need auto-rebuild, or can we make them
WAL-safe eventually?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
