Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
>> Is there anything stopping us going through the code and finding all
>> ereports that can be fixed by a REINDEX, and issue a HINT with all of
>> them saying that they should REINDEX the broken index?
>
> How would you know which ones correspond to REINDEX-fixable conditions?
>
> I generally dislike hints that tell people their first action should be
> to destroy the evidence, anyway. If they had an index problem, REINDEX
> will guarantee there is no chance of learning anything about it.
I couldn't agree more. Look at this very instance. He now found the
right reindex command and the corrupted file is gone. We don't have the
slightest clue what happened to that file. Was it truncated? Did some
other process scribble around in the shared memory? How do you tell now?
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
